• 









% 






= O v 



\ +~r 



'% 



V- ,^v 



^ ^ 



\ 'j 



otf 



,0 o 









£ r <K 



.>. " 1/ i - 



sS> 



"^'. 








^ 










°*. 






























































V * * A '->, 




"O, 






V 






^ % 









^v 



x°°- 

'•■« ^ '"' ^ ' A)' .OKC ,'V' 



^> '- 









■0' * 









%>.# 











0c> 



.A* 






,\>' -p- 



-<p, <p 






TIIK 



SOPHISTES AND POLITICUS 

/ 
OF PLATO, 



WITH 



A REVISED TEXT AND ENGLISH NOTES, 



BY THE 

REV. LEWIS CAMPBELL, M.A. 

PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ST. ANDREWS. 



OXFORD: 

AT THE CLARENDON PRESS. 
M.DCCC.LXVII. 



k 















:\ 



CL.^% \aLj- 



TO THE SENATUS 

OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ST. ANDREWS 

^Jns S^Horli ts respectfully Enscrtfotr. 



Tof? Koivfj tl Trp&TTOvcriv ayairrjTov 6[iovoeLV. 

Plat. Polit. 260 b. 



PREFACE. 



THE present work is a continuation of an edition 
of Plato's Thesetetus which appeared at Oxford in 
1861. Where these are inconsistent with each 
other, the editor hopes that his later will be 
found to correct his earlier views. 

Bekker's various readings from thirteen MSS., 
and Stallbaum's from the six collated by him, 
have been carefully consulted in revising the text. 
It is to be regretted that later editors of Plato 
have not had the opportunity of collating the seven 
MSS. which Bekker saw in Italy in 1817-18, but 
does not refer to in his Commentary. Schneider 
also, in his edition of the Republic, mentions having 
seen at Florence a MS. containing the Politicus, 
which appeared to him to be of considerable value. 
The readings of the Bodleian MS. are fully re- 
corded by Gaisford in his Lectiones Platonicse, 
the publication of which led Bekker to dispense 



V\X EFACE. 

with his intended visit to Oxford ("nolui actum 
agere"). The MS., however, has been ((insulted 
afresh, and several new readings from it will be 
found in the notes, for the most part of little 
moment, and agreeing with Vat, A. and Ven. IT. 
The special errors of the Bodleian, as of other 
MSS. of the calligraphi, are generally of a super- 
ficial kind. The omission of accents and of the 
iota of the imperfect diphthongs is curiously fre- 
quent. In these dialogues this MS. has only one 
instance of contraction, viz. ovvlioi for ovpavw in 
Polit. 273 c. But there is, perhaps, evidence of 
the earlier use of contractions in the mistaken 
expansion of aKpoav into aicpifiwv (Theset. 148 c), and 

of Trpa.'yiJ.aTeia.v into 7rapaSeiyfj.a.Teiav (Polit. 279 a). 
Compare Pllileb. 36 e : irdcra^ cKppotrvvais V. 1. wapa- 
(ppocrvvais. 

Corrupt places have been marked with obeli, 
and the most probable corrections are printed in 
large type in the notes. Words whose authority 
is doubtful, from their omission in some MSS., are 
bracketed. 

A few conjectural emendations, which appeared 
highly probable, have been admitted or retained 
from former editions. These are marked with 
asterisks, that the reader may have some intima- 
tion of the state of the text. 



PREFACE. 9 

The Sophist has been edited in Germany, with 
explanatory notes, by Heindorf and Stallbaum : 
the Politicns only by Stallbaum, who, although 
abundantly familiar with Plato, is inferior to 
Heindorf in taste and judgment. Many scholars 
have contributed to the elucidation of particular 
points. But these dialogues, perhaps more than 
most other ancient writings, require for their 
interpretation that they should be taken as a 
separate whole, and studied by their own light. 

To <5' airiov, tt>? oi/uLai, TrpoXovaiv ov% tjttov earai 
KctTCKpaves. (Polit. 287 b.) 



SOPHIST AND STATESMAN 



PLATO. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

-A.S the discovery of truth and the direction of life are the 
twofold function of philosophy, so Plato saw a twofold counter- 
feit of his ideal educator and governor in the professors of 
wisdom and the public men of his time. The one corrupted in- 
quiry with controversy, the other spoiled politics with faction. 
These Sophists and party leaders seemed to exhaust between 
them the serious interest of the Greek world. ; for the poets, 
sculptors, painters, and other " imitators with their child's 
play/' were by this time of less account. There might be 
jealousies between these two great powers, who formed the 
intellect and heart of every state, but they were usually in 
league, and together held the public ear. Rarely, either in 
the present or the past, might be traced the footprints of a 
more august presence; of a Divine spirit "coming down in 
the likeness" of sage or legislator. Such glimpses of the Phi- 
losopher and true potentate were few and far between, and 
he had always been either misunderstood or rejected by man- 
kind. The writer of these dialogues, whom for the present 
we assume to be Plato, seems to have viewed this spectacle 
with a feeling strangely mixed of curiosity, interest, and scorn. 
In approaching his subject by a circuitous track, he makes 
inquiry the vehicle of satire, and satire of inquiry. But it is 
not to be inferred from this that the inquiry or even the per- 
plexity which he exhibits here is merely ironical. On the 
b 



ii (iEXKRAL IXTKOD! (TION. 

contrary, Plato is nowhere more intensely speculative, nor is 
the aim of his discussion anywhere more real. This appears 
even from the form in which the questions are asked. In 
other dialogues the character of Gorgias or Protagoras, Thra- 
s\ machus or Polus, is dramatized, and certain hints thrown out 
as to the nature of their profession; casual remarks are made 
on the career of Pericles, Themistocles, and other servants of 
the state: but here not a single name is mentioned; the spirit 
of inquiry (as described in the Theaetetus) refuses to deseend 
to individuals or to things near at hand, and the ideal Sophist, 
the ideal Statesman, each character in the utmost generality, 
is at once represented and defined. Again, in other dialogues 
certain abstract questions are proposed, such as, What is cou- 
rage, prudence, justice? and in the Theaetetus, What is know- 
ledge '( But even " Sophistic" is not a purely abstract con- 
ception : the Sophists were a real class of persons, having, as 
Plato believed, certain common characteristics. The state also 
is an essentially complex thing, and the statesman can only 
be known in relation to the state. This union of the universal 
and the real, this personifying of a general notion, this attempt 
to descend into the complexity of life without losing hold of 
metaphysical conceptions, may be regarded, even on an external 
view, as a leading peculiarity of these two dialogues. 

And the form in this case truly indicates the substance; for 
these writings are, together with the Theaetetus, the most dis- 
tinct record which remains to us of a great effort, of which other 
traces are found in the Parmenides and Philebus, by which Plato 
endeavoured to bridge over the gulf which the first impulse of 
philosophy had made between the absoluteness of Knowledge 
and Being and the relativeness of Sensation and Appearance. 
In some dialogues the phenomenal side of this antithesis, while 
dramatically represented with great liveliness, is dialectically 
annihilated; opinion, custom, the conceit of knowledge, are 
brought on the stage with ironical circumstance for a prepared 
overthrow; and the difficulty is stated, but not fully met — How 
can virtue, not based on science, be virtue at all ? But here 
the same difficulty is presented in a more general aspect. The 
hollowness of pretended wisdom, and the futility of existing 
governments, are taken for granted or summarily proved. But 
the question is, How can the real and the apparent, the ideal 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. iii 

and actual, coexist? And yet they must. For the non- 
existent cannot bo the object of attack ; and unless true ideas 
can be brought to bear on the actual circumstances of men, 
there is no hope of remedying the evils of which the world is 
full. This speculative doubt, while giving rise to certain 
changes in Plato's theory of Knowledge, forms the link be- 
tween these dialogues and the Thcastctus. That their con- 
nexion with that dialogue is not merely outward, is the more 
probable because the Theastetus, though ending, like the 
Philebus, with a promise of further talk, wears no appearance 
of being the first instalment of a larger design. But if, as 
would appear from this, the two dialogues were conceived and 
written at a later time, their author would not, without good 
reason, present them as a continuation of an earlier writing. 
And it may be regarded as a sufficient reason, that he was 
now engaged with the more objective phase of the same anti- 
thesis, of which the subjective aspect was developed in the 
Thesetetus ; for the opposition between the Absolute and 
Relative, which the mind experiences in contrasting Know- 
ledge with Sensation and Opinion, is also seen by her as the 
contrast between the Real and the Unreal, and between the 
Ideal and the Actual ; when, for instance, the pretended wise 
man is compared with the true lover of wisdom, and the great 
men of this world with the perfect King. The chief aim of 
each inquiry, however, is not so much to point the antithesis, 
as to draw together the opposite poles ; to find room for the 
relative beside the absolute ; to obtain a meeting-point between 
idea and fact. As in the Thesetetus the question, " How is 
false opinion possible?" was met by an unsuccessful effort 
to conceive the mode in which thought acts on sensation 
and memory, so in the " Sophist" there is raised the parallel 
question, How can that which is not, appear to be? And 
this doubt is, for the present at least, removed by raising 
Difference (i. e. Negation) to the rank of an idea or category, 
which has "communion" with, or participates in, Reality or 
Being, and may thus become the object of thought. The cor- 
responding difficulty in the Politicus has a double aspect. First, 
What place is there for an ideal of government at all ? This 
question is answered by the supposition of alternate cycles, in 
which the world is first guided and then left alone by God. 
b 2 



i\ GENERAL ENTRODUCTION. 

Secondly; How is science to be applied to government during 
the inferior cycle in which we now livei* The latter question 
is only provisionally answered; but in a way which points to 
the conception of an accommodation or oevre/jos tt\ovs, which 
Plato afterwards embodied in the Laws. 

The main difficulty which assumes these different forms (that 
of the relation of ideas to phenomena) is clearly stated in the 
I'armenides (to which dialogue allusion is made in the Thea> 
letus, and again in the Sophist), and receives a passing notice 
at the opening of the Philebus. And the final elucidation of 
the whole subject, the delineation of the bright form of Being, 
the reconcilement of the speculative with the practical reason, 
and the attainment of a perfect method, were probably the 
destined task of the " Philosopher," a dialogue which was to 
have ended this series or tetralogy of dialogues, but which it 
does not appear that Plato ever composed. Whether he in- 
stinctively turned back from an impossible enterprize, or whe- 
ther, after he had once descended into the phenomenal world, 
ethical and cosmical intci'ests predominated over the merely 
speculative, it is clear that the aspiration after an ideal 
certainty which appears in these dialogues, and also in the 
Republic and elsewhere, but which is here combined with a 
promise that the very exactness of truth (clvto 7-d(cpt/3e5, Polit. 
284 d) shall be hereafter displayed, is nowhere satisfied. Nor 
was the hope attainable in the infancy of science. But it is 
not unlikely that Plato intended to place this keystone of the 
dialectical fabric when he should take in hand to define the 
Philosopher. 

We have before us, therefore, the middle portion of an 
unfinished work, looking backwards on the Thesetetus, pro- 
bably across an interval (with a momentary glance at the 
Parmenides), and forwards to an unwritten dialogue. Having 
taken note of this, we may draw a little closer, — to a point, 
however, from which the two dialogues can still be taken in 
one view. There are marked and obvious differences be- 
tween them. But these will be better seen when they are 
examined separately : in a general survey it is more im- 
portant to notice, without exaggerating, the features which 
they have in common. 

§ 1. The subjects of both dialogues arc nearly related to 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. v 

each other. The Sophist and Statesman were, as already 
noticed, the main representatives of the world as it then was, 
of the leading thoughts and principles of Plato's contempo- 
raries. Could these typical men be reduced under definitions t 
Was a scientific knowledge of them possible ? Did the vague- 
ness of the science which they professed extend also to them- 
selves? In what relation did the Sophist stand to the Philo- 
sopher, or the members of existing governments to the true 
King? There is however this difference of treatment: that 
whereas the " Sophist" is from the beginning a search for the 
definition of pretended knowledge, the distinction between 
reality and pretence only appears in the Politicus towards 
the close. 

§ 2. In both an extreme or premature ideal theory is modi- 
fied : in the Sophist the dictum of Parmenides annihilating 
" Not-Being ;" in the Politicus the Pythagorean notion of a 
theocracy under the Divine King. The mere abstract " num- 
bers" of the same school, are exchanged in the Politicus (in 
another connexion) for a relative standard determined by the 
idea of Good (to jue'rptov) ; and, in the Sophist, either the 
same Pythagoreans, or the Megarians, or some of Plato's own 
followers, are criticized as the " Friends of Ideas." 

§ 3. In both there is a deep vein of irony, or rather of 
satire. The assertion of Socher, that in these dialogues the 
Socratic irony is silent, could only be justified if it had been 
meant that the irony is rather that of Plato. The humour 
with which the chase after the Sophist is maintained, the fear 
of his great cunning, the solemnity with which he is described 
as a soul-purifier; and in the Politicus, the notion of the crane 
exalting himself at man's expense, the quiet substitution of 
Lydians and Phrygians for Hellenes as distinguished from 
Barbarians, and the description of a state in which navigation 
and medicine should be administered according to legal pre- 
scription, are touches of an irony singularly Platonic. It is 
true that the wild playfulness of the Phsedrus and the dramatic 
liveliness of the Republic are absent, and that the humour 
is not unmixed with bitterness ; but the occasional shadow of 
misanthropy is not more unlike the caustic cheerfulness of 
the Gorgias and Meno, than is the sad smile and sober 
colouring of the Laws. Two points may be noticed in which 



vi OENERAL [NTRODUCTION. 

the dialectical method conveys the effect of irony. First, 
n is remarked thai science is a great leveller, she cares 
equally for Bmall and great; hence the physician and the bath- 
man are equally good examples of the purifier; the general 
is a species of huntsman, so is the vermin-killer; priest, pro- 
phet, archon-basileus, are servants equally with the shopkeeper 
and the household slave. Akin to this is the mode in which 
the Sophist is thrust down by the process of divisions, and is 
found in a low place amongst the class of imitators; just as 
Pleasure in the Philebus, after aiming at the highest rank, has 
assigned to her, by the same process, the fifth and lowest. 

§ 4. Both dialogues are pervaded, or rather haunted, by 
the idea of scientific method. Every inquiry, even that con- 
cerning Government, is held to be important, chiefly as an 
exercise by which the dialectical faculty may be improved. 
The nature and function of this power are described in each 
dialogue in language which forcibly recals the well-known 
passages of the Phsedrus and Philebus, and which even the 
most doubtful critic must admit to have a Platonic flavour. 

" To distinguish things according to their kinds, and neither 
to account the same form to be another nor another to be the 
same, is surely the work of dialectic. And the dialectician 
is he who adequately perceives one idea pervading many 
separate things, and many distinct ideas embraced by one, 
and many such wholes pervaded and knit together in one 
crowning form, — many also completely isolated and sundered. 
And what is this but to know how to distinguish the respects 
in which each kind admits or rejects communion with other 
kinds V (Soph. 253 d, e.) 

" But because they have not been accustomed to distinguish 
the subject of an inquiry into its forms, they not only confound 
things so widely different as the More and the Too-much, the 
moment they see a similarity between them, but fall also into 
the converse error of dividing things not according to their 
parts ; whereas the right way is, when one first perceives com- 
munity in a multitude of things, not to desist till one have 
seen all the differences contained within that common nature, 
all, that is, which rest upon any logical distinction; and on 
the other hand when dissimilarities are seen in a mass of 
objects, the eye should be incapable of contentment or rest, 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. vii 

until one have confined all that is kindred within the pule of 
one resemblance, and fenced them round with the new crea- 
tion of a single kind or category." (Polit. 285 a-c.) 

The notions of Sameness and Difference, and of the corre- 
sponding arts of collection or combination, and division or 
distinction (aw ay coy 1), bia[peais, avyKpuiK.r\, btaKptTLKij), are pro- 
minent in many places of these dialogues. The Elenchus is 
described as purifying, that is, dividing the good from the 
bad. The chief " kinds" next to Being, are Same and Other. 
Dialectic is the science of the communion and exclusion of 
kinds, and language itself would be impossible without a 
similar process of combination and distinction. And these 
logical forms have also a practical bearing ; for the art of 
the true statesman, like that of the weaver, consists in com- 
bining elements which have been first separated and purified. 
Thus it appears that the process of classification, involving 
generalization and division (avvaywyr] and biaipecnn), is only a 
particular application of a form of thought to which a meta- 
physical and a practical as well as a logical importance is 
attributed. But it has been felt that the " dichotomous " 
classifications of these dialogues are a caricature of method, 
and are unlike anything which is to be found elsewhere in 
Plato. "Are we to suppose," it has been asked % "that the 
Dichotomous Method of the Sojjhistes Dialogue (I may add 
of the Politicus, for the method is the same in this dialogue 
also) is the method of division of a subject according to its 
natural members, of which Plato speaks in the Phsedrus?" 
Is it the same, it may be further asked, which Plato has him- 
self used in the Phasdrus, Gorgias, Philebus, Republic, and 
elsewhere ? The likeness is unmistakeable, (compare espe- 
cially the close of the " Sophist'''' with that of the Philebus and 
of the sixth book of the Republic) ; but so also is the differ- 
ence, consisting partly in the extent to which the method is 
carried, and partly in the arbitrary and superficial character 
of some of the divisions, when compared with the dialectical 
analysis of madness in the Phasdrus, or with that of pleasure 
in the Philebus. And although there is no reason to suppose 
that the division of each kind into two parts only was a novelty 
(for this is required in the Philebus), there appears a further 

a By Dr. Whewell. Cambridge Phil, Soc, Tr. vol. ix. pt. 4. p. 594. 



viii GENERAL [NTRODUCTION. 

refinement on this notion, when, in the Politicus | 262 b), the 
pupil is advised to divide each as nearly as possible in half. 

It has liccii suggested, in order to explain this difference, 
that thf ThesBtetus and Sophista (with the Politicus) were 

meant respectively to serve as examples of the two parts of the 
Dialectic process; the Theffltetus of avvayuyrj, the Sophista 
and Politicus of Statpeaty. But although the Theaetetus affords 
many good specimens of Socratic induction, it is not less fertile 
in the negative instances by which that induction was tested. 
Generalization thus alternates with distinction or division 1 '. 
On the other hand, no more striking example of avvaycayr] 
could be given than the generalization of OrjpevTiKi] in the 
Sophist, or the seven categories of industry in the Politicus. 
And in the latter dialogue a separate discussion is devoted to 
the subject of example, that is, the act of bringing resemblances 
together (avvayeiv). The existence of such an intention, then, 
can hardly be established, and the comparison of the Theae- 
tetus only throws the characteristic peculiarity of these dia- 
logues into stronger relief. 

We learn from a comic fragment (quoted at length by 
Dr. Thompson of Cambridge, in his paper on the genuineness of 
the Sophista) that when Plato, Speusippus, and Menedemus were 
together in the Academy, they and their scholars were ridi- 
culed for their endless minute classification of natural objects; 
and Aristotle speaks more than once of " written divisions" 
(yeypaufxevai StatpeVets), which, as they seem in some points to 
have coincided with those advanced in these dialogues, may be 
conjectured to have been extant in the school of Plato. It seems 
not improbable that this new passion for classification as a me- 
thod of science, which had a germ in Socrates and the Eleatics, 
and ripened afterwards into the analytic of Aristotle, was in 
full bloom at the Academy when these dialogues were written, 
and that Plato, who entered into every phase of thought, but 



ffvvaywyri, 




Sialpecris, 


67ritrT7]|U7) = aicrdrjens * 




4iri(frr)fj.y] ovic alffdyais' 


w aladavnfxeOa = ^vxv- 




86£a a\-r)Qr)S, \pevSfis' 

aAridJis aArjOijs fxcTa \6you 

KivrjfTis = aWoioiais, (popa. 


c A then. II. 59 ; Com 


Gr. 


Fr. VIII. p. 370, ed. Meineke. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. ix 

was entirely possessed by none, took up the method, as he 
takes up that of etymologies in the Cratylus, " for the day." 
This may account for the unusual number of the divisions. 
But how is the peculiar nature of many of them to be ex- 
plained : 

a. First, the lesson is meant to be progressive. Thus the 
external and superficial character of some distinctions is at once 
accounted for by the often-repeated Platonic maxim, that the 
elements of truth must be spelt out in easy syllables, before 
the meaning of truth can be read. The most obvious data of 
sense and experience are the primer of thought. The simplest 
examples are chosen to illustrate principles of reason, not as 
being adequate, but because they can be apprehended at once. 

But there may be also traced in the method of these dia- 
logues a progress of a deeper kind. The argument of the 
Theaetetus, though generally destructive, left two results : 
first, that the mind gathers from the impressions of different 
senses certain common perceptions ; and secondly, that know- 
ledge and right opinion imply distinction, i. e. definition by 
the characteristic difference. This definition by difference, we 
will suppose, was becoming recognised as an organ of know- 
ledge, and the youth of Plato's school were delighted with 
their new exercise. We can imagine them, according to their 
master's description, rejoicing as if they had found a treasure of 
inexhaustible wisdom, first rolling up the ball and then unrolling 
and dividing, and never content till they had made everybody 
else to share their wonder. The negative aspect of Socratic 
inquiry, the controversial dialectic of Zeno, the Pythagorean 
<TvaTotyJ.ai } had all contributed something to the intellectual 
fashion now in vogue. In the " Sophist" Plato chooses to con- 
verse with this " old friend with a new face," he will assay to 
prove this weapon, which is obviously two-edged, and no less 
available for controversy than for inquiry. He begins with an 
example, which he executes in the most approved style, and 
the method is found to be abundantly adequate to define the 
fisherman. Then he tries several passes at the Sophist, but 
does not transfix him, though the creature is soon driven into 
a corner, and his enemy exults in an approaching triumph, 
when suddenly the wily monster disarms him and turns against 
him his own weapon. (Soph. 239 d.) 
c 



x ( I EN ERAL I XT RODU< JT ION. 

The exclusive divisions by which the game has been so 
far pursued proceeded <>n the ground that Difference meant 
logical exclusion; that, for instance, because making is dif- 
ferent from acquiring, production and acquisition cannot be 
attributes of the same art : and we have been surprised to sec 
the Sophist starting up on the left side of the cordon which 
wo had drawn, when we thought to have secured him on the 
right. At last he seems to be convicted of pretence, that is 
of appearing to be what he is not. He retorts that " what- 
is-not" has no Being, and can neither be denned nor criti- 
cized : a position which is only met by reconsidering the whole 
question of negation and difference, and also of Being, in a 
discussion where the vaunted method of exclusions is laid aside. 
It is at last found that ideas which are distinguished from each 
other may still be mutually related. Whereon follows the 
remark that mere " oppositions of science" are not philosophy. 
(Soph. 259.) The effect of this discovery may be traced in 
the Politicus. Not only are the two elements of generalization 
and distinction much more nearly balanced (it was always im- 
possible for either of them to be entirely absent), but more 
care is taken to define the relation between the members of 
each division. The respondent is significantly warned that 
every logical segment must be a natural part, and have a 
form of its own, i. e. that the distinction must have a rational 
ground or principle : he is told that the external resemblances 
and differences of objects are easily mastered, but that there 
are qualities of another sort, which cannot be perceived with- 
out a " vision and a faculty divine/' A mistake arising from 
dividing without generalizing sufficiently is corrected ; side by 
side with the partition of science appears " the interrogation 
of every nature, in order to learn what special contribution 
each has to offer from the store of experience to the treasury 
of wisdom ; " and we are reminded that it is not enough to 
define a subject by a single characteristic difference, for that 
nothing is completely known, until all other species, at least 
those of the same genus, have been also distinguished and 
defined. (Pol. 362, 285 e, 275, 272 e, 281 c.) 

Thus mere logical division by means of negatives is criticized 
by Plato on nearly the same ground as by Aristotle, who ob- 
jects that a negative term as such is not divisible. "Aristotle," 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xi 

says Mr. G. II. Lowes, " has here pointed out the scientific 
error of all classification founded on negatives, and his criti- 
cism reaches even the familiar division founded by Lamarck 
between vertebrata and invertebrata. The vcrtebrata form a 
natural division, characterized by an obvious peculiarity, but 
to lump together all other animals, no matter how manifestly 
different, merely on the negative character of their having 
no vertebral column, is, except as a provisional expedient, 
eminently unphilosophic" But Plato employs division by 
exclusions precisely as a provisional expedient. His object 
is not the classification of many things but the definition 
of one d . He never attempts to divide a class which is only 
known by a negative characteristic 6 . And he has himself 
striven to remedy the defect in question ; for he has observed 
that things are not perfectly distinguished until the mutually 
exclusive positive qualities of both are known. 

fi. Further, the end of this progressive lesson in dialectic is 
not to exalt a formal method, but to quicken and regulate the 
free action of the inquiring mind. Plato never conceived, as 
some modern philosophers have done, that a new method 
could possibly level intellects, or become a substitute for inven- 
tion. He never imagines a form of thinking as separable 
from thought. His dialectic is not a dead organon, but an 
inspiration, a divine gift, which may be imperfectly described 
in words, and by oral teaching may be awakened and stimu- 
lated in the philosophic nature, but cannot be once for all 
embodied in a book of aphorisms or a Chrestomathy. Dialectic 
is the right application to the highest subjects of the twin 
operations of distinction and combination, which are present as 
elements in the simplest exercise of the reason : whether the 
difference and resemblance noted be that of two fingers or of 
two virtues, the process is essentially the same. But thought 
is liable to perversion, and Plato is never weary of distinguish- 
ing argument from controversy (Sia/Ve/cri/oj from avnXoyiKrj or 

d This remark also supplies an an- and to Mr. G-rote's observation that 

swer to the other objection of Ari- Plato would have objected to class 

stotle, that the species of a genus are the wolf with the dog. 

by this method sometimes unnaturally ° He always follows the " right 

separated (e. g. birds are divided be- hand" section: Kara tovtt\ 5e|ia aet 

tween the land and water animals), fxepos rov T/x-qOevros, Soph. 264 e. 



xii GENEH \L [NTRODUCTION. 

(pHTTiioj). Perhaps controversy is too respectable a name for 
that ape of the Elenchus, a barren hybrid between Zenonian 
and Socratic method, which seems to have been a favourite 
pastime in the schools of Athens as well as Megara. The 
faults which Plato assigns to the devotees of this " illogical 
logic" of disputation arc chiefly the following, (i) They con- 
fused verbal with real agreement and difference. (2) They 
assumed that agreement and difference must mutually exclude 
each other not only in idea but in fact f . (3) They argued 
about first principles when consequences were in question, and 
vice versa. (Phasd. ioi e.) (4) They generalized too hastily 
both in the way of induction and deduction. (Phileb. 17.) 

(5) They chose sensible in the place of ideal distinctions. 

(6) They substituted abstract reasoning from a single isolated 
notion for real inquiry into the nature of things. (7) They 
preferred the exercise of logical ingenuity to the common 
interests of mankind. (" Water, the cheapest of commodities, 
is the best, says Pindar," Euthyd, 304 b.) (8) From the 
want of any true command of ideas, they distinguished in the 
wrong place and failed to distinguish in the right. These 
errors arose in great measure from making victory and not 
truth the end of discussion, and the mental result of the pro- 
cess was a vain-glorious scepticism. Such at least is Plato's ver- 
dict on the character and tendency of much of the intellectual 
activity of his day. And he has occasionally, even in the 
person of Socrates, given not unconscious illustration of this 
Attic euphuism, just as our own master of thought and ex- 
pression sometimes condescended " to speak most infallibly" 
in the " conceited" vein of his contemporaries. 

Now it is a chief purpose of the present dialogues to coun- 
teract this vice of the reason, by conveying wholesome ideas 
about logical method. And one idea which they convey with 
tolerable clearness, by example if not by precept, is that the 
right course to be followed in an inquiry cannot be altogether 
prescribed by rules, but is in great measure the direct result 
of original thought and inventive power in the inquirer?. 

f Plato seizes upon this as the key- gested, in the infancy of logic, the 

stone of their method, a principle bor- notion that positive and negative attri- 

rowed from the Eleatics,who in saying, butes are absolutely incommunicable. 

" Being is," " Not-Being is not," sug- £ Cf. especially Phsedr. 269 e. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xiii 

Whether the method of divisions or some other shall be em- 
ployed, what general form shall be selected for tho primary 
division, where to draw the line in each subdivision, when 
to introduce example and comparison, when to exchange 
logical for metaphysical reasoning, and when to seek the 
aid of imagination; all such points are entirely left to tho 
prescient insight and selective judgment of the leader of the 
discussion. 

y. Another lesson not doubtfully taught in these pages is, 
that the subtilty of nature is not exhausted by a single line 
of classification. The several paths by which the Sophist is 
approached, and the shorter and longer way to the definition 
of the genus Homo in the Politicus (not to dwell now on the 
ironical humour of this passage), shew that method has not yet 
stiffened into system. The division of the arts of life not into 
two but seven distinct "limbs," warrants the same inference, 
which is strengthened by the comparison of other dialogues 
(see next section), and by the playful and satirical uses of 
generalization and division noticed above. (§ 3.) In both dia- 
logues the "divisions" at the opening and the close belong 
rather to the framework than the substance of the thought, 
and the real movement of the argument is almost wholly in- 
dependent of this outward form ; though certainly not inde- 
pendent of the great laws of agreement and difference, of 
which Plato's crvi/aycoyq and biaipeats are the expression. 

Plato's views on method, when thus stated, may appear 
strangely simple, as the errors to which they are opposed 
were gross ; but the errors, however gross, were typical : 
and his thoughts, however simple, may find many an instruc- 
tive application in the later history of science. That all true 
method is an extension of the natural operation of the mind, 
and, instead of making inquiry an easy task for all men, is 
inseparable from that last and highest acquisition and gift, the 
philosophic spirit, are maxims of which the schoolmen and 
Bacon were equally in need. The " prudens qugestio" of the 
latter (the " mental initiative" of Coleridge) is a notion which, 
at the expense of consistency, redeems the misconception of a 
levelling method by approaching to the Platonic point of view. 
Nor is it fair to speak of the method which Plato approved as 
merely subjective (G. H. Lewes), in the face of his protest 



xiv (JKNERAL INTRODUCTION. 

against the arbitrary manipulation of logical forms. His 
metaphysical ardour docs not prevent him from blaming, but 
rather constrains him to chastise those who in their frigid 
ingenuity closed their eyes to the light of facts. His faith in 
dialectic was, in other words, a faith in an order of the Uni- 
verse which could be discovered by the patient use of genuine 
inquiry, and by this alone. Although verification, in the 
modern sense, was almost entirely absent from his method, 
and his idea of " nature" was of course different from that 
which later discoveries have made familiar ; yet the importance 
which he attaches to the duty of following the real lines and 
veins of things as they are, of " hitting the joint" in carving 
the body of truth, and, what amounts to the same thing, the 
stress which he lays on the distinction between an accidental 
and a natural part (juepos and ei§os, a mere • portion find a 
form h ), are indications of a general conception of Jhe-- task of 
philosophy, Avhich is not to be confounded with the- '.German 
notion of evolving thought from itself, or the Scotch method of 
introspection in psychology. How facts are to be ascertained, 
he has not determined ; but that the discoveries of the true phi- 
losopher are matters of fact, and not mere notions of his own 
mind, is an axiom without which much that he has written 
would be unintelligible. But it is no less an axiom with him 
that every true fact is also an idea, and were it not so would 
be incognizable ; and that the only real concatenation of things 
as they are, is that which dialectic gradually reveals to the 
inquiring reason. Would Bacon have said otherwise, if "form'" 
were substituted for "idea," and for "dialectic" the "interro- 
gation of nature," a phrase which occurs almost verbatim in 
Plato's Politicus ? Or will any modern reasoner dispute the 
assertion that the Laws of Nature are only discoverable by 
the right exercise of Mind ? 

Plato's contribution to the positive science of Method was 
indeed most simple, but, at that juncture in the history of 
philosophy, of extreme value. Not to anticipate further here, 
what must be described at length in examining the " Sophist," 
his position is briefly this, that to divorce analysis from syn- 
thesis, negation from affirmation, variety from unity, distinc- 
tion from mutual relation, is fatal to the interests of inquiry. 

h Compare Protag. 329 d. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xv 

"Cupid comes forth from an egg whereon Night hath 
brooded, i.e. Knowledge is obtained by exclusions and nega- 
tives." Yes, but Knowledge is affirmative, and the negations 
arc seen in the result, only like the dark spaces on a polarized 
spectrum, caused, as natural philosophers tell us, by the mu- 
tual interferences of waves of light. 

A contrast and a parallel, both taken from within the limits 
of the Platonic dialogues, may fitly conclude this section. 

a. When the peculiar form of dialectical exercise which at 
first sight appears to reign in the Sophist and Statesman, 'is 
compared with that of the more purely Socratic dialogues, 
abstracting from the Pythagorean notion of bisection and the 
Eleatic absoluteness of distinction, this mode of handling a 
subject appears like an abridgment of Socratic procedure. 
From long familiarity with the successive steps, the disciple is 
ready for a more summary process, and a generalization and 
distinction to which Socrates would have led the way through 
a morning of ironical banter, is now disposed of by a few 
rapid strokes. The argument from pleasure being the good 
to science being virtue, which fills several pages of the Pro- 
tagoras, would not have occupied ten lines of the Sophist. 
And a further stage of this transition from conversational 
profuseness towards scientific exactness and compression may 
be observed in the latter of these two dialogues, where the 
dichotomies, by which the art of weaving is defined, are enu- 
merated in close succession in a single sentence ; a doubly 
condensed form of intellectual nutriment, which proves too 
strong for the respondent to assimilate at once. (Pol. 379 c — 
380 b.) 

/3. The parallel of the Philebus will be frequently suggested 
as we proceed by many likenesses of style and structure. We 
now confine ourselves to one point, which bears immediately 
on the question of method. There is a passage near the 
opening of that dialogue (p. 16) which distinguishes the right 
from the wrong application of the eternal opposition and inter- 
change of the One and the Many to the analysis and synthesis 
of ideas. It is interesting to examine how far the directions 
there given correspond to the procedure here employed. 

" In every enquiry we should set before us one idea, which 
we shall find, if we look for it, in the subject of our investiga- 



xvi GENERAL [NTRODUCTION. 

tion." So in oacli of these inquiries the idea of Knowledge, or 
of a person who knows, is immediately recognised and .selected 
for analysis. "And in this one idea we must look for two, if 
we can find two, or if not two, then the smallest number pos- 
sible." This rule is also strictly followed, which is the more 
noticeable, because no such principle is laid down in the Ph©- 
drus. In the case of the seven "summa genera" of civil life 
(Polit. 287 c), we are expressly told that it is impossible to 
divide them into two parts; and it would be obviously difficult 
to reduce the number, except by an abscissio infiniti, which 
would be out of place, because some of the kinds which arc 
in direct competition with the kingly art would then be left 
undefined. " We must then proceed to subdivide these units, 
until we see, not only that the one idea is both one and many, 
but also how many are its real subdivisions." In the Sophist 
and Politicus, as well as in the Pha3drus, the notion of the 
aTfjiriTov eTSos, or species infima, has an important place (cf. 
Soph. 289 d), and the danger of passing at once from the 
highest generality to the lowest specialty is exemplified (e. g. 
Polit. 263). 

" In like manner, when one is compelled to start from the 
indefinite (in cases where there is not immediately apparent a 
single comprehensive idea), he ought not all at once to spring 
from infinity to unity, but should find a number in the undis- 
tinguished mass, and so proceed from number to number 
until he reaches unity." (Phil. 18 b.) It is more difficult to 
prove that this precept is exactly obeyed. But the cautious 
spirit thus enjoined may be illustrated from several instances 
of gradual generalization, as where the speakers cry a halt 
to count up the number of forms in Avhich the Sophist has 
appeared, previous to one of these being selected as the most 
universally applicable (Soph. 231 d) ; or where from the 
narrower generalization, " nurture of men," they pass on to 
the wider conception of "care or superintendence of men" 
(Polit. 275) ; or where from the comparison of the king and 
the weaver (implying a provisional generalization) is evolved 
the more general notion of an art of combination (auyKptn/o/) 
(lb. 282 b). 

§ 5. The forms of Sameness and Difference appear in the 
Sophist amongst the five kinds or forms which are selected 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. x\ii 

for examination as being the "greatest," or the most universal. 
" Being," the highest of all, was found to embrace the oppo- 
site principles of " motion/'' the essence of the materialist, and 
"rest," that of the idealist philosopher. On comparing these 
three " kinds," each is seen to have sameness and difference, — 
to be the same with itself, different from the other two. And 
these predicates of sameness and difference are found to be 
no less universally applicable than the form of Being. Thus 
Being, Sameness, and Difference, to use Aristotelian language, 
are universal predicaments, or categories. Everything, of 
which we can speak, exists, is the same in one relation, different 
in others, and is either at rest or in motion or both in different 
ways. " Number" is incidentally mentioned in the same dia- 
logue (238 b) as being also an inseparable attribute of every 
possible term. 

Again, in the latter part of the Politicus, there is an enume- 
ration of seven kinds, as an ultimate division of the industries 
which are the helpers of the ruling power in a state. These 
are — raw-material, instruments, reservoirs, vehicles, cover- 
ings, amusements, food. To these summa genera of human 
labour is added the work of servants of every sort. And it 
is not obscurely implied, that with the addition of the royal 
science as a moving and regulating cause, this enumeration 
affords an exhaustive analysis of human activity. Thus in both 
dialogues there is seen a tendency to select certain natures or 
ideas as being the highest and most comprehensive, either of 
all ideas, or of the ideas belonging to a particular subject. 

If we except the Tima^us, where something similar is observ- 
able in the constitution of the Psychical Substance (p. 35) and 
in the five elements, which however are not viewed as by any 
means ultimate 1 , the only other dialogue where there is a 
similar enumeration of categories is the Philebus, where Being 
is analyzed into Limit, the Unlimited, their union, and the 
cause of this ; and the end of Being, or the good, is embraced 
in five kinds, Measure, Symmetry, Reality, Mind, and Pleasure. 
An approach, however, to a similar notion may be traced in 
two places of the Thesetetus : first, where the ideas selected 
as the undoubted objects of pure mind are Being, Not-Being, 

1 Tim. 48 b : ouS' iv a-uWaPrjs slSeai povov. A remarkable anticipation of 
modem chemistry. 

d 



xviii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

Sameness and Difference, Likeness and Unlikcness, and Num- 
ber J; and again, where in the "aviary" of tbe mind, wbile 
most of tbo " birds" or knowledges are collected in larger or 
smaller groups, a few arc seen careering through every part. 
(ThesBt. 197 c.) 

Tbis peculiarity of these three dialogues, Pbilebus, Sophista, 
PoliticuSj affords a point of comparison or rather of approxi- 
mation between Plato and Aristotle. The only previous 
attempt at ultimate classification had been the oworoixiai of 
tbe Pythagoreans, and in the greater number of Plato's dia- 
logues, even where ideas (or forms) are mentioned, there is no 
selection of a certain number as supreme and as embracing all 
others, except partially in the case of moral ideas. Even 
when the form of good is described in the Republic as surpass- 
ing in glory and dignity the idea of Being, this saying has 
rather a cosmological and ethical than a logical or metaphy- 
sical meaning. But here not only is the word yiios for the 
first time k employed in the technical sense, but each of the 
terms so described is viewed as a universal, containing a 
variety of species, and obtained by a process of induction 
(aw ay cay i]. See Phileb. p. 25) ; and each enumeration is, for 
the time being, and in relation to the particular question raised, 
regarded as ultimate. This is therefore a nearer approach to 
a doctrine of categories than the casual reference to quantity 
(Soph. 245 d, Phileb. 24 c), quality (Rep. 4, 438 b, Theset. 
182 b), relation (Soph. 255 c, Phil. 51 c), action and passion 
(Theset. and Soph.), in scattered passages. 

But the categories of Plato are not connected with the theory 
of Predication, towards which, as appears even from Soph. 
261 c, Plato had made but little progress. Even those of the 
" Sophist" are rather ontological than logical, and are more 
nearly analogous to the " four causes" of the Metaphysics : 
denoting, to use a convenient distinction of Plotinus, rather 
the elements than the kinds of Being. And he is less bound 
than Aristotle to his own forms of thought. The enumeration 
is in no two places the same. In the highest region of dia- 
lectic Plato still asserts the freedom of Mind. He "stands 

J Theset. 185 d. Compare Parrnenides, p. 129 e, where Eest and Motion are 
added to these. 

k The only exception is in Phasdrus, 271 b. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. my 

behind" the forms which ho has invented to express what 
cannot be fully expressed, the electric play of thought. Col- 
lection and distinction, union and division, finite and infinite, 
same and other, one and many, Being and Not-Being, are 
various names for the two poles on whose attraction and repul- 
sion depend the " high-strung harmonies'" of the ideal world. 

§ 6. Not less peculiar than the method of these dialogues 
is their structure, style, and diction, which, however, receive 
considerable illustration from the Philebus, Timaeus, and Laws. 

To take first what is most obvious, Socrates is no longer the 
chief speaker. A stranger from Elea, with whom Theodoras, 
Theaetetus, and the younger Socrates have been conversing, 
accompanies them to the place of meeting, where they are 
expected by Socrates; who, with his accustomed pertinacious 
politeness, brings on a conversation, but with the exception of 
a few words when there is a change of subject, is silent for 
the remainder of the morning. In this respect this pair of 
dialogues is like the Parmenides, Timaeus, and Critias, and 
resembles the two last named also in another equally external 
point, namely, that each pair form the middle part of an 
unfinished tetralogy. Plato has only twice thus connected 
dialogues in a series. The Theaetetus, Sophist, Statesman, 
and Philosopher, are in this the counterpart of the Republic, 
Timaeus, Critias, and Hermocrates. 

The retirement of Socrates, however, though in keeping 
with, will not account for, the other peculiarities of which we 
are now to speak. For the few words assigned to him at the 
beginning partake of the general change of tone. Nor can this 
be ascribed to the subject ; for the subjects of either dialogue, 
though related to each other, are wholly distinct. 

Every reader of Plato must have felt a difference in passing 
from the Republic or Phaedrus to the Sophist and Politicus ; 
or, may it not be added? to the Philebus or the Laws. He is 
like one who, after walking with a gifted friend in town and 
country, and hearing him converse with all men, sits down to 
listen to a lecture from the same person. There is an air of 
self-imposed restraint, at the first glance distinguishable from 
the absolute conversational freedom of the Gorgias, a didactic 
tone, unlike the Socratic dissimulation of knowledge, a vein 
of refined and biting satire, which may be contrasted as well 

d2 



xx (JKNERAL INTRODUCTION. 

as compared with the naive and playful humour of the Phsedrufl 
or Charmides. As the student proceeds, he is struck by the 
more elaborate, though not more regular conformation of the 
periods, by the more frequent, almost monotonous recurrence 
of a certain rhythmical cadence, which he may have noticed 
here and there in the Phaedrus, Republic, and Thcsetetus 1 , by 
the precision of manner into which the Socratic urbanity has 
been transformed. And if he examines more minutely into 
the diction, he will find that the natural order is more often 
inverted than in the dialogues with which he is familiar, and 
that a greater fondness is shewn for unusual words, both 
poetical and technical, than in any dialogue except the Phas- 
drus, Republic, Timaeus, and Laws. In some respects the 
language approaches to that of tragedy, in others to the 
formality of an Aristotelian treatise. 

(i) To dwell a little more at length on some of these points : 
and first, on the more didactic and systematic manner of the con- 
versation. Nothing can exceed the courtesy and modesty both 
of Socrates and the Stranger in the opening scene, but when 
the Eleatic guest and his respondent have once crossed blades, 
he deals with him, not without pleasantry, but with a becoming 
degree of gravity, and secundum artem. There are no sallies, 
like those of Glaucon in the Republic, no sudden bursts of 
eloquence, as in the Phaedrus. With a tone of mild authority 
the philosopher, for the edification of the bystanders, guides 
his pupil by a path familiar to himself to conclusions which 
he foreknows. He acknowledges from the first that he is 
thoroughly conversant with the whole subject (Sia/oj/coeVcu ye 
(f)r]<Tiv Ikcuj&s koX ovk aixvi]ixov€iv), and warns his new acquaint- 
ances that the argument will be a long one. 

The peculiarity in question is obviously shared by the Par- 
menides ; less obviously, though still perceptibly, by the 
Thesetetus. It is also observable in the Philebus, Timasus, 
and Laws. 

The Philebus has certainly more of the well-known playful- 
ness and familiarity of Socratic talk, more light and shade, 
and, in parts, more dramatic liveliness. The fine contrast, 
for example, between the eager Protarchus and the petulant 

1 See also the myth in the Protagoras. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxi 

Philebus is unlike the almost featureless masks of the facile 
respondents in these dialogues. But such lighter elements are 
controlled by a certain degree of formality, and by the con- 
sciousness of method. The speakers are playing at a ''labo- 
rious game "V to which they are evidently not unaccustomed, 
and which proceeds according to certain rules. We are not in 
the market-place, or the house of Callias, but in the groves of 
Academe. And though the "boys" are not quite so tractable 
as Thesetetus, Socrates guides them by a regularly intricate 
road to a definite end, which has a positive as well as a nega- 
tive import. The structure of the Philebus is in many ways 
nearer to the Sophist than that of either is to any other 
writing. As the ideal pretender is chased through the one 
dialogue, so the idea of pleasure, more or less personified, is 
hunted down in the other. The difficulties which arise in both 
are solved by means of a harmony of ideas (called in the Phi- 
lebus Koaixos rts arra/jLaTos, a "bodiless creation"). In both, the 
transitions (fxeTafiaaeis) of the argument are only surpassed in 
dialectical subtilty by the Theaetetus. Both account for false- 
hood by a similar analysis of mental states ; both examine 
contemporary philosophers as diviners of that which they do 
not clearly know. In both, higher subjects are discussed than 
that proposed at the outset, which is accordingly thrust down, 
in both by a similar method of divisions, to the lowest place in 
the scale of knowledge or of being. In some of these respects 
the Politicus also presents some analogy to the Philebus ; and 
they resemble each other in the importance which they both 
attach to the philosophy of Measure. On the whole, the style 
of the Philebus may be described as intermediate between that 
of the Republic and that of the Sophist. That of the Sophist 
and Politicus, again, is intermediate between the Philebus and 
the Timseus and Laws. In these the gravity of tone already 
noticed is deepened into solemnity, and becomes the pervading 
characteristic. The keen though suppressed irony of the So- 
phist and Politicus, directed not towards the respondent, but 
against mankind, is here softened (like wine becoming first 
austere, then mellow), and either disappears, or is replaced by 
grave and gentle reflections on human nothingness. The 

m Parm. 137 b'- frpayfiaretwdtj irctiSiav iraifav. 



xxii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

bitterness of a mind which had man)' thoughts which could 
not be realized, now takes tlio sober colouring of an eye 

"That hath kept watch o'er man's mortality ;" 

and the didactic manner of the chief speaker is more decided. 
There is the most perfect modesty, but no dissimulation of 
knowledge. The leader of the conversation speaks with an 
authority to which the rest defer. The results, though still 
only approximate, arc in the highest degree positive, and the 
method is throughout constructive. The thoughts of a life- 
time had assumed something like a permanent shape : and 
they were the writer's own. They were still living thoughts, 
and could give a reason of themselves; but they no longer 
needed the art of Socrates to bring them into being. Cicero 
was substantially if not literally right in assuming the Athenian 
Stranger in the Laws to be Plato himself. 

(2) The loss of conversational freedom and liveliness is 
accompanied by a corresponding decline of poetical grace and 
power. The fire of enthusiasm is not extinct by any means, 
but is concentrated on a few great objects (Dialectic, Being, 
the Philosopher, the creation and preservation of the universe 
by God), and is less ready to light up with a spontaneous glow 
every new world of imagination. The language is less instinct 
with harmonious energy. The fondness for poetic words is of 
the kind which belongs rather to a learned rhetoric than to 
poetry. The genius loci, so powerful in the Phaedrus, is here 
forgotten. The Eleatic Stranger is like the Sophist he de- 
scribes, whose " sense is shut" to everything but the dry light 
of reason. Speaking in a palaestra, he alludes in the most 
distant and general way, when the topic is suggested by his 
argument, to " certain exercises in which men are trained in 
groups at Athens and elsewhere." (Polit. 294 d.) Speaking at 
the time when Athens was ringing with the trial of Socrates, 
he never once alludes to a matter so sublunary. Indeed he 
expressly disowns any intention of giving pleasure, and lays 
down the principle that the standard by which the propor- 
tions of an argument are to be judged is not that of artistic 
symmetry. (lb. 286 d.) Such was not the spirit of the pre- 
cept that " an argument must be like the picture of a living 
creature, having head and feet and every member drawn in 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxiii 

seemly proportion to each other and the whole. " (Phsedr. 
364 c.) It has been remarked that the allusions to previous 
writings, such as the Republic, which occur in the Laws, are 
unlike the maimer of the earlier dialogues, where every 
touch is in perfect dramatic keeping. Now, not to mention 
the manifest allusion to the Parmcnides in Soph. 217 c (more 
pointed than in Theset. 183 e), the direct reference to the 
argument of the " Sophist" in Polit. 284 b (Kadanzp ev to> 
ao<pL(TTf] TTpoarjvayKacraixev tlvai to [xrj oV), though not violating 
propriety, because the company is unchanged, has more of a 
literary than a dramatic turn, and is more in the manner of 
a treatise than of a dialogue. And this is still more obviously 
the case in Soph. 253 c, where the Stranger quotes the lan- 
guage of a conversation at which he had not been present. 
(Theset. 172 d.) 

(3) Yet although there is less of spontaneous movement and 
artistic lightness of structure than in some other dialogues, there 
is more appearance of studied order and arrangement. Thus 
a reason is given for the introduction of the example of the 
fisherman in the Sophist, and the example of the weaver in 
the Politicus occasions an explanation of the use and meaning 
of example as an instrument of thought. And in making the 
transition from the dichotomies to the myth in the same 
dialogue, the Stranger gives due notice of the change, and 
anticipates the course to be taken when they return from this 
digression. The "preludes" and "recapitulations" of which 
the Phaedrus speaks so disdainfully are now recommended 
with some emphasis by Plato. This avowedly conscious and 
studied arrangement of the parts of a discourse is still more 
noticeable in the early books of the Laws, where, to explain 
the tediousness of the preliminary discussion, the speaker says 
(1, 638 e) that he is endeavouring to make apparent the right 
method to be pursued in all such arguments. He is in fact, 
like the Stranger in the Politicus, giving an Example of 
Example. Such carefulness about the form of a writing, at a 
time when the form was really becoming less perfect, and also 
the composition of great works, and the connexion of succes- 
sive pieces in a series, may be thought to indicate a different 
sense of the value of books from that expressed in a well- 
known passage of the Phaedrus. And this suspicion is con- 



xxiv GENERAL [NTRODUCTION. 

firmed by a striking expression in the Laws, where the chief 
speaker, reviewing the conversation which they had held since 
dawn, maintains that no better education could be devised for 
youth, than to learn by heart this new kind of poetry, which 
he and his companions have poured forth, "not unaccompanied 
with airs from Heaven." (Legg. 7, 81 j c.) 

§ 7- (Avvano 8' dv tis, el /3ov\olto, nal ras vnb rov Ylkdrojvos 
6 vo p:a<T 6 e [eras rey^vas ravras tTTapiQjxelv, kol ra ovv avrais ovop.ara, 
etre cnrovha(m> e^pT/ro toi? 6vop,acnv etVe koX jxtj. Aeyco be, Ota to 
ev kvioLs tS)v ovop.drcav fiiaiorepov xPWdai. Pollux, Onomasticon, 
VIII. 33, p. 206, 7.) 

More palpable, though not more real, than these general 
nuances of style, are certain peculiarities of diction. Of these 
perhaps the most obvious to a cursory reader is the use of 
technical expressions. Mr. Cope has well observed, in the 
Preface to his translation of the Gorgias, that one of the 
most striking peculiarities of Plato's philosophical writings is 
the almost entire absence of any scientific terminology. He 
adds, that "with the exception of one or two peculiar terms, 
such as etSos or Ibea and SiaAe/cn/cr/, and the special appro- 
priation of btdvoia and dvpoeibes in the Republic, and possibly 
one or two others, Plato's philosophy is absolutely devoid of 
any technical phraseology." 

This remark applies with perfect truth to the Gorgias, Pro- 
tagoras, Phaedo, and most other dialogues. The technicalities 
which occur in the Phsedrus (except biaXeKriKos, awayeayi], 
bimpeais) are quoted with contempt. But the Thesetetus 
already bears the marks of an opposite tendency, which 
becomes more decided in the Philebus, Sophist, and Politicus. 
Each theory advanced in the Thegetetus is characterized by 
an incipient terminology, which, like the theories themselves, 
is not entirely set aside. Thus to express the doctrine of 
Sense we have klvtjctls, noiovv, rrda^ov, aloOrjcns, alaQrvrov, cpopa, 
7ToV arret, aladavop.eva, alaOrjrris, Kptr-qpLov, rb alo-da.v6p.evov, ttoi- 
6tt]s, each having a definite meaning required by the theory ; 
and two of them, alaOrjrrjs and ttchot^s, being evidently new- 
fangled words. Other terms of the same kind which are pro- 
duced in the later phases of the discussion are eKp.ayelov, p.vr]- 
p.e'iov, emcrr-tjprjv eyziv, KenrrjaOaL, ersioTy\rd, aroL^e'iov, crvXka^r}, 
hiacpoporrjs. There are words of a more general character, 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxv 

such as araXaftelv, 'to resume,' hiopi(zcr6ai, 'to distinguish/ 
which receive a preciscness of meaning from familiar use which 
they could not have had in ordinary speaking or writing. It 
is true that even Plato's technicalities are fresh from the mint ; 
they retain the gloss of novelty, and the hues of life. But no 
student of these dialogues can doubt that there was floating 
before him the conception of a scientific language, based on 
dialectic, which should express more perfectly than they were 
known to the first name-giver the true sections and combina- 
tions of things. The Heracliteans were indeed ridiculed in the 
Thea3tetus (183 b), because their theory confounded the ordi- 
nary use of speech : but even this ridicule shews that the 
notion of a philosophic vocabulary was already there. (Cf. 
ib. 166 b.) And in defence of one of the strangest of his 
coinages (Sofo/u/xquKTj), towards the conclusion of the Sophist, 
the Stranger gravely says that for want of the power of 
dividing "kinds" into their "forms" the vocabulary of the 
ancients was most defective. (Compare Cratylus, 436-439.) 
Yet he is careful to vary his new-made words, so as to avoid 
the hearer's being enslaved to them, and commends the youth 
with whom he converses for not setting too high a value on 
the choice of a name. (KaA<3? ye,a> Sajjcpares, k&v bia4>v\a£ri$ 
to [xr) crnovbafav k-nl tols ovoixam, Trkovcn<oTepos els to yrjpas 
ava<pavr}o-ei cppovriaeas. Polit. 261 e.) Thus it is evident that 
the invention of new terms was intended to enrich language, 
and not to limit thought. 

Of the words in these dialogues which are either new or 
receive a distinctly new significance, there are many which 
Plato does not use again ; but there are others which are 
found to recur, especially in the Laws. The following are not 
used again by Plato : — 

Soph. — * ayopacris, abiavorjTos, * apakXrjTLKOs, * avbpa,T>obi.(TTL- 
kos, t avOpisbTiiKos, * av6p(oiro6r)pla, f airaTrjTiKos (Xen.), * aenra- 
\l€vtlk6$, ^avToirtokiKos, avTovpyitcos (M. Anton.), * fiakavevTiKoSj 
* 8r;/xoAoytKOs, * ho£op.i[ir)Tr]s , * Sojfo/xi/u^u/cds, * So£o7rcu8et>n/cos, 
bcoprjTLKOS (Philo.), bcopo<popLKos (Ael.), * elbaiXoTTouKos, * dbcoXo- 
7roids, * dbcoXovpyLKOS, * evavTioiroLoXoyinos, f ZiubeLKTiKos, * kpno- 
QrjpiKOS, * (<Ao6r]p(.a, *fao9r]pLK.6s, *7]bvvTiK6s, *i]\j.spody}piK6s } *6av- 

* aira£ \eyofxeva. + Used by Aristotle. The places out of Plato where 

the rest occur are chiefly in later Greek. 

e 



xxvi GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

fxa(o-?)TOTTOiiKo's, ^IbtuOiipevTiKos, * IhioOrjpla, | to-ropi/c^s, tK°^ aoTl - 

KCn 1 , f KTTjTLKOi, * /J.a0r]lXaTO7Ta>\lKU<i, ■)• IX€Ta(3Xl]TlKOi, ^ VZVCTTIKOS, 

* vo[XL(T[xaToiTU)\tKus, oi\acoriKo\", oZk€TI/COS, * upOuXoyia,* Tit(fiOr\pia, 
* TTtfrOiipiKus, 77 lOavovpyt.KU'i, f ttX^ktiku^, * TTpoaop.LXrjTLKOS, * 7rvp- 
eun/c?/, ttu)\titik6s, * o"7royytoTtKos, f (Twe^tta, Tpiohovria, tyav- 
tckttikos, * (pOapLCTTiKos, * x €t P &)rtK0 ' s ? * yjJr}p.a.To<pQopu<.6s } * \/feu- 
8oupyos, * \l/v^ep.TJopiKO'i. 

Polit. — * ayeAaioKo/j.iK(fc, * dyeAaiorpocpia, * ayeXaioTpcxpinos, 
f aKtpacrTOs, f aneparos, f aKe'pco?, aKeoTiK?;, * avOpw-ovo/MKos., 
fapxirzKToviKos, &crTpo<pos ( = without a twist), furp?i7os, *aiiTe7U- 
tcikt?/s, * aiircTTtraKTtKo's, yvaxm.KOS, * yop$amKo's, * Sepparovpyi- 
koSj f btaKooXvTLKos, * k-ni6r]p,arovpyia, f €7np.eXrjTLKos (Xcn.), e7Tt- 
orau/co's, f k-niTaKTiKos, f epyaoriKo's, * zvQvnXoKta, * faoyevris, 
(a)OTpo<p(a, faoTpcxpiKos (Clem. Alex.), fflpejrraos, i8ioyei;7?s, * 1810- 
yovCa, i5to'r7js, *lbLOTp6(pos (Ar. uses lbtorpo(pos), * IpanovpytKcfc, 
^l-niroipopftia, ^iTnrcxpopfios, KeXtvariKos (Plut.), * Kepta-annos, Krj- 
Pvklkos (Clem. Alex.), * Koivoyem}?, * Koivoyovla, * KOLVorpcxpLKos, 
t KplTLKOS, * KpOKOVr)TlKOS, * p.ay€VTlKOS, * pt-ovorpocpCa, * vrjarutds, 

vop.€VTiKos, wfAcptvTrjs ( = one who unites in marriages), *£ayTi- 
kos, t iqpofiaTiKos, ^^rjpoTpocpiKos, *TTe(ovopuK.6s, 7tepLJ3kr)p.a, 7T€pi- 
Kakvp.p.a, t TrtkqTLKOSj t ttAuptikos, * irpo^XrjpLaTovpyLKOs, TrpuTO- 
yevrjs, * TTT€po<pvq<i, pvOpuKos (Plut.), a-iToupyo's', crre/cn/co's, <nr]p.o- 

VOVTjTlKOS, * <TTllpLOVO<pVriS, * CTTptTITlKOS, (TVyKpiTLKOS, (TVpLTrXeKTLKOS, 

avvOeTiKos, * avviKpavcns, avarpocp-q (abstract), raAacriovpyiKos, 
Tidacreia, f Tpijaris, rprjTos, rpi\ivos } * vyporpocptKOS, "* (pAoiori/ccfc, 
(ppdyp.a, xaAKoruTiiK??. 

Soph. Polit. — * apLcpiafiriTriTiKos, avTOTrwXyjs, ■*" y(/<)z>a<pei>riKO$. 

The following are found in other dialogues : — 

* ayKLarpevTLKOs (Soph., * ayxiaTpda Legg.), aypapLparos (Po- 
lit. Tim. Critias), dyooznoriK?; (Soph. Legg.), apLvvrfpLos (Polit. 
Legg.), /3ta<TTt/cos (Soph. Legg.), SiaAirriKo? (Poht. Tim.), Sofo- 
<ro<pia (Soph. Phil.), etKaortKTj (Soph. Legg.), dpoovLnos (Soph. 
Legg.), * kvvypoQripiKos (Soph., * ivvypoOrjpevT^s Legg.), f fV 
Spo? (Soph. Polit. Tim. Legg.), f nadaprLKos (Soph. Tim.), * j>ov- 
6zt7]tlk6s (Soph. Legg.), opvLdevTcnos (Soph., dpvidevTrjs Legg.), 
iraiyviov (Polit. Legg.), 7rAeKUKo? (Polit. Legg.), t^Ken-aa-fid (Po- 
lit. Legg.), oracriaoTUos (Polit., oracrtcoreta Legg.), CTtyacrpia 
(Polit. Tim. Critias), f avyKpurLs (Soph. Phil. Tim. Legg.), <pap- 
IxaKOTToa-ia (Soph. Legg.). 

Besides this class of words, whose use is thus shewn to be 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxvii 

not wholly confined to the two dialogues, thcro may be ob- 
served in them two other kinds of a language approaching 
technical, which are nearly related to each other : terms ex- 
pressing the operations of dialectic, and words connected with 
the mathematical and physical sciences. 

a. Of the former sort are Soph. — avrCOecris, (Wfoeijuai, diro- 
TeXevTrjais, * acrvvvovs, SmtAo't/, ZvavnoXoyia, p.aKpoXoyos, 7rpop.e- 
Aer<3, f (pdcrts. Polit. — /3e/3aioocris, (karroo, f biovop.d(a>, 8ix«t w j 
f bixoTop,S>, inrpoTTrj (tov Xoyov), kvdpyeia (met. from painting), 
Ae7rrovpy<3, * p.eaoTop.S>, 6vop.aaCa, Tra\4(t)s, f irpoa-aTro^aiVco, av- 
vdpi(p(i). Soph. Polit. — <TWT€pLVG> ( = assist in dividing). And, 
recurring elsewhere in Plato, — d-nopLepLfa (Polit. Legg.), ano- 
(tx^(>> (Polit. Legg.), ta0-X taTO? (Soph. Tim.), aropo? (Soph., 
cf. arpjyros Pha3dr.), ye'i-os (as a metaphysical term, Parm. 
Soph. Polit. Phil. Tim. Legg., and once in Phaedr.), *yrw- 
piens (Polit. Legg.), beapios (a bond uniting ideas, Soph. 
Polit. Phil. Parm. Tim. Legg.), bidyvaxns (Soph. Legg.), 8ta- 
XoyiCppLcu (Soph. Phil. Tim.), 8iapepA>&> (Polit. Phil. Legg.), 

* biav6r](n<s (Polit. Tim. Legg.), *biat:opG> (to raise a difficulty, 
Soph. Tim. Legg.), biaKpifioXoyovp\ai (Soph. Tim.), 8taxwpt'(a> 
(Polit. Phil. Tim.), | &">p«rpos (Polit. Tim.), eKKptva (Polit. 
Legg.), emvepLGd (Polit. Legg.), fpe'0e£ts (Soph. Parm.), pep^co 
(Soph. Polit. Parm. Tim.), pepfc (Soph. Legg.), -napoo vvpnov 
(Soph. Legg.), Ttpoop.oXoyovp.ai (Soph. Tim.), iipocrKoiva>v(a 
(Soph. Legg.), a-vyKe(pa\aiovp:aL (Soph. Phil.), f avvoXos (Soph. 
Polit. Legg.), * o~vvop.oXoy(.a (Soph. Legg.), o-xtfa (Soph. Polit. 
Phil. Tim.), Top.r\ (metaphorical, Soph. Polit. Tim. Legg.). 

/3. Words expressing physical and mathematical conceptions : 
Soph. — fipaTToo, biaKivG> (? 226 b), TropKos, f TrXaaTos. Polit. — 

* depatperos, yvd\j/is, evrJTptos, tyrjo-Ls, koXXt)t6$, * /cpoKcoS???, f pe- 
raXXevco, vico, vr\6(a, vr\p.a, * ^airrjs, 7rAef is, o-ndprov, * avyKep- 
K[((a. Recurring — dp,€rpo$ (Soph. Phil. Tim. Legg.), avanv- 
kXt](tls (Polit. dvaKVK.Xovp.ai Tim.), avaroXi] (Polit. Legg.), 
dveiXCTTu (Phileb., avetXigts Polit.), dirXavijs (Polit. Tim. Legg.), 
f a^ea-ts (Polit. Legg.), /3po'xos (Soph. Critias), fyivzem (of 
production in general, Soph. Polit. Phil. Tim. Legg.), yvp.va- 
0-7779 (Polit. Legg., 7rai.boTpi[3r}s is the usual word in Plato), 
t§ia0eo-is (Soph. Phil. Tim. Legg.), biaOpavw (Soph. Tim.), 
bidden? (Soph. Phil. Tim. Legg.), ^buqOziv (Soph. Tim.), 

* bpvorop.iK'q (Polit., * bpvorop.(a Legg.), Z , nio-K6vd(op,ai (Polit. 



xxviii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

Legg.), tTTcairevOG) (Polit. Legg.), cvkvkXos (.Soph., quotation 
from Parm., Tim.), IcrorraX'ks (Soph, quotation from Parm., 
Tim.), KaraK(fo-jU?7<ns (Polit. Tim.), KaraOpavo) (Polit. Tim.), 
*nvK\r)<ns (Polit. Tim.), nvpros (Soph. Tim. Lcgg.), £atv<i> 
(Soph. Polit. Lcgg.), ixirprja- is (Polit. Legg.), ^erp?jr6s (Polit. 
Lcgg.), irapak\a£t$ (Polit. Tim.), Trapd(j)opos (Soph. Lcgg., 
irapacpopoTrjs Tim.), 7n/£is (Polit. Phil.), 7rAdros (the dimension 
of breadth, Soph. Polit. Critias, Lcgg.), 7r\eyp.a (Soph. Polit. 
Tim. Lcgg.), rrpofBoXi] (Polit. Tim. Lcgg.), * patyr] (Polit. Tim.), 
avyxpaaLs (Polit. Phil.), avyKpiais (Soph. Phil. Tim. Lcgg.), 
avp.pu£is (Soph. Polit. Phil. Tim. Legg.), o-vixtti\G> (Polit. 
Tim.), * 0-vpnrobrjyovp.ai (Polit., irobriye'iv Legg.), avp.(pvi]S (Soph. 
Tim. Legg.), ovvv(palva> (Polit. Tim.), aa>p.a, " body in gene- 
ral,'^ to crwjuaroetSes (Soph. Phil. Tim. Legg. 896), ttjktos 
(Soph. Critias), TpoiTij, as an astronomical term (Polit. Tim. 
Legg.), vkrjV (Polit. Phil. Tim. Critias, Legg.), vitepoyj\ (Polit. 
Legg.), vcprj (Polit. Legg.). 

y. As the terms just enumerated betray Plato's love for 
those physical pursuits which were rejected by Socrates, so 
the new word aOeorrjs, which occurs only in the Politicus and 
Laws in all Greek literature before the death of Plato (unless 
we must add the seventh Platonic Epistle), affords an indi- 
cation of his tendency to religious thought. And it is a fact 
worth noticing in this connexion that the word ayios is con- 
fined to the Sophist, Critias, and Laws, amongst the Platonic 
writings, and ol KpeCrroves as a euphemism for ol 6eoC to Soph. 
216 b, Epist. 7, 326 e. 

Perhaps the notion of technical language (voces artis) may 
be thought to be unduly stretched in being extended to some 
of the words under the last two headings. But in whatever 
way they are described they are equally suitable to be adduced 
in the present section, whose object is to define and illus- 
trate peculiarities of diction. There remain to be noticed 
words borrowed from the poets, and especially from the trage- 
dians : respecting which it may be observed that the affecta- 
tion of unusual phrases, which appears in the Phaedrus as the 
result of a half playful dithyrambic and epic fervour, at which 

p The introduction of this word is TrpooToyevh elSos in the Politicus is 
interesting in connexion with Ari- one of the few anticipations in 
stotle's Material Cause, of which the Plato. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxix 

Socrates himself wonders, is here interwoven with grave and 
unimpassioncd talk, giving a tone of sustained dignity to the 
style. To this class (8) belong : — 

Soph. — avT(<TTaOp:os, a^evos, airpa^ia, ap^aioirpeTri'is, u<(>0ey- 
ktos, bvcreib/js, eia 8?/, davcFTepov, ^KaOibpvGO, piaXOaK&s, vcIkos 
(quoted from Emped.), 6Xkt6t]p6s, pvfxrj, v\}/66€v. 

Polit. — a\e£r]Ti]pios (Xen.), &Xis (Xen.), airaypm (Thcophr.), 
aTroAe/xa)? ^X ( - lv ) a^ 1 " 7 ?^ *apyvpap.oi[S6s (cf. xP urra M ol /3os), fior)- 
Xcltt]?, (3ov(pop(36s, yereiw, bioiypa, e^avOco, evyi'oocrros, evKpiro?, 
%(pebpo$, Otacros, K&Tayp,a, Kepaa<popos, p,zXaivecrdai, vop.^vu> ) 
oirXicrpLa, napeia, itepLamij, TToXvirXavijs, 7rpo<T(p6eyyop:ai, crvvrpi^. 
Under this head also might have been classed aorpcxpos and 
vvpLcpevTiqs. 

Soph. Polit. — a-neprip,6o). 

'Ay?/pcos (Pol. Phil. Tim. Legg.), ad&os (Soph. Legg.), avrd- 
£ios (Polit. Legg., in the former with tacit reference to the 
line of Homer which is quoted in Symp. 214 b), a7rAeros 
(Soph. Legg.), yeirovQ (Polit. Legg.), beo-noris (Polit. Tim. 
Legg.), StaXayxava) (Polit. Oritias), bienrepao) (Soph. Tim.), 
e7revx°M at (Soph. Critia. Legg.), sv(ovvp,os ( = of auspicious 
name (Pind.), (Polit. Legg.), fjavxaios (Polit. Legg.), KpT/m's 
(Polit. Legg.), Kpvcpcuos (Soph. Tim.), ^/xe'xptTrep (Soph. Polit. 
Phileb.), £ivws (Zevs) (Soph. Legg.), ^oir-pirep (Soph. Tim. 
Legg.), ^TrapLirav (Polit. Tim. Legg.), irapafypoavvr] (Soph. 
Phileb. ?, irapafyptov Legg.), (p?j) irXaaT&s (Soph. Legg.), 
ttoXlos (Polit. Parm. Tim.), oreAAo^cu (Soph. Phileb. Legg.), 
f a-vvbpop.o's (Polit. Legg.), f <rvvvop.o$ (Polit. Tim. Critia. Legg.), 
^crvvTpocpos (Polit. Legg.), TpvnXovs (Polit. Tim. Legg.), x e P- 
<tcuos (Soph. Tim. Legg.). Next to which, for convenience 
sake, may be classed some unusual compounds and derivatives 
which have a similar rhetorical effect (e) : — 

Soph. — *aTTopapTvpop:ai, cbo'ppvycns, *bva6ijpevTOs, f eTraXXa&s, 
€VT]vCo}s (adv.), Kado, nvXivbricrLs, kcoAwi?, Trpordrropcu, *a-Korei- 

Polit. — ^airopprjp.a, ^yepavofiaria, Sia/3ovAevop.cu, SuoTcara- 
IJiaOrjTos, kyKaipia, eioreAo 
i'pebpa, IbtOTtjs, * KOiv&vrn 
ourjptia, irapLcpvXos, irpoKpims, \pr\Topzla, fcriiyKaTapiywpi (Eur. 
H. Fur.), "* avjj.p.ip:ovp,ai, f crv\x-napaKoXov6G>, crvvayvpp.6s } crvvaTio- 
reAw, *<TwfaaKv(3€pv&, aaxppoviKos, ^xrjvopaTia, *xiXtavbpos. 



xxx GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

'Aypci/ijuaro? (Polit. Tim. Critias), dicparr/? (Soph. Legg.), 
avdarcLTos (Soph. Legg.), airibzlv (Sopli. Philcb. Legg.), afap- 
ixi]vivti) (Soph. Legg.), acpAa/cros (Polit. Legg.), ZyKiiipos (Polit. 
Legg.), etiboais (Polit. Legg.), ep:i7opeuriKos (Polit., Zfj.TTopevoiJi.ai 
Legg.), cv6.pi6iJ.os (Soph. Philcb.), kirUXriv (Soph. Philcb. Tim.), 
e^Aa/3^'? (Polit. Legg.), evTrpe-rnjs (Soph. Polit. Legg.), fT/pep-cuo? 
(Polit. Legg.), f tfypauAeiv (Polit. Legg.), Ito-ploty]? (Polit., 
hap-m Legg.), Karairavoi (Polit. Philcb.), \xe6r}p.e pivos (Soph. 
Tim.), p.i]vvTris (Polit. Legg.), fpia-flcoens (Soph. Legg.), p.ovap- 
X^a (Polit. Legg.), fvoptofler^a (Polit. Legg.), -nepikd-nb) (Polit. 
Tim. Critia. Legg.), tt poap.ly wp.i (Polit. Legg.), 7rpocrn;)(?/s 
{yiyveaOai tivi), (Polit. Legg.), (TKorohtvla (Soph. Legg.), cvy- 
yvp,vao-Tijs (Soph. Legg.), avyKaTaa-KevdC^ (Polit. Legg.), avK- 
Xayyava (Polit. Tim.), ^avvaTrepydCeaOat (Polit. Tim.), *avv- 
hia-novS) (Soph. Legg.), crvve(pe7Top.ai (Soph. Tim. Critia. Legg.), 
To\p.rip6s (Soph. Legg.), tcl ^vt]Qivra (Soph. Tim.), yoXenoTr\<i 
(Soph. Critia. Legg.). 

The facts thus enumerated indicate as characteristic of the 
language of these dialogues, (i) An extreme minuteness of 
distinction, giving rise to new compounds and derivatives, and 
to the employment of old words with new shades of meaning. 
(2) An affectation of variety, leading to different modes of ex- 
pressing the same thing. (3) Combined with these a learned 
fulness of diction, commanding the resources of the written as 
well as of the spoken language, and moulding old words to 
the expression of new ideas : e. g. vvp.(pevTrjs } " one who brings 
together in marriage;" aypap.p.a.Tos, "unwritten ;" ao-rpocpos, 
" without twisting." (4) The frequent and familiar use of 
words denoting physical and mathematical as well as ethical 
conceptions. To which may be added (5) the tendency to 
fix in language some of the leading generalizations of philo- 
sophy. This last point affords a partial approach to the 
terminology of Aristotle, who has adopted several of the terms 
here used. The re-adoption of words from the poets and 
early writers, and the invention of new compounds, are charac- 
teristic also of Isocrates and Xenophon; and many of the 
words thus introduced became part of the vocabulary of the 
later prose writers. But when the five points are taken to- 
gether, the language of these dialogues is seen to be that of 
Plato, with the peculiarities somewhat exaggerated ; the most 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxxi 

marked features being the invention of technical expressions 
and the preference for words belonging to the tragic period 
of Greek poetry. 

That these dialogues shew an increased tendency to the 
use of a peculiar diction, is proved sufficiently by the occur- 
rence in 108 pages (ed. St.) of 270 words not found else- 
where in Plato, and upwards of 90 words not found in 
other Greek writers. It is true that 60 of these 90 words, 
and about 90 of tho 370, may bo set down to the method 
of dichotomies, but there remain the goodly allowance of about 
180 words peculiar to these amongst the Platonic dialogues, 
and at least 30 airag dpr][j.4va } a number which might be in- 
creased if it were lawful to add those words which do not occur 
earlier, and which later Platonists, like Plutarch and Clemens 
Alexandrinus, have evidently adopted from this source. 

But there are Platonic dialogues in which there are equally 
marked peculiarities of diction. These are the Phsedrus, Re- 
public, Timseus (including the fragment of the Critias), and 
Laws. The first of these abounds in poetical words, and 
there is probably no writing of equal length from which so 
rich a vocabulary could be procured. But this may partly 
be accounted for by the unwonted enthusiasm which Socrates 
confesses that he feels " swelling in his breast." The rich 
garment of expression, "stiff with cloth of gold," is confessedly 
worn for the occasion ; and though bearing a certain relation 
to the language of these dialogues, has an air of wildness and 
novelty, and a brilliance of unpremeditated force which is 
absent here. The case of the Phsedrus then may for the 
present be treated as exceptional. And the same may be said 
of the Republic, which abounds in peculiar words, not from 
singularity, but from an overflowing richness and variety. 

The Timseus, Critias, and Laws, in 436 pages have 1492 
words which occur nowhere else in Plato. Of these nearly a 
third part belong to the Timasus and Critias, which in 91 pages 
have 427 words which occur in no other Platonic dialogue. 
This large proportion is no doubt in part due to the peculiarity 
of subject; but in the Laws alone, which as a political and 
ethical treatise is not materially different in this respect from 
the greater number of Plato's writings, there are (in 345 pages) 
nearly a thousand words which he has not used elsewhere. 



jcxxii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

Jt remains to ask whether in those dialogues which have 
a peculiar vocabulary the peculiarities are of the same kind. 
This question may be partly answered by glancing at the lists 
of words given above, and counting the number of those in 
each category which occur in the Sophist or Politicus, and in 
the Tiniams, Critias, or Laws, but appear in no other dialogue. 
The coincidences noticed under the first head will appear 
especially striking. It will also be seen that the coincidences 
•with the Philebus, although not numerous are characteristic, 
especially under /3. See especially yivos, yivzcris, 77?^ts, o-co/xa, 
vXi]. This line of proof might be indefinitely extended by 
adducing words peculiar to the latter dialogues but similar in 
kind to those peculiar to the former % and words which 
though not peculiar to them are found to occur with in- 
creased frequency in both 1 ". It may be left to the student 
to examine these analogies for himself; but to give cogency 
to these "concomitant variations 1 ' it is necessary to present 
the negative side of the inquiry. It has been shewn that the 
Sophist and Politicus on the one hand, and the Timseus, Critias, 
and Laws on the other, have certain peculiarities of diction ; 
and also that these peculiarities are to some extent the same 
or similar. It must be further inquired whether any other dia- 
logues equally with the Sophist and Politicus share the pecu- 
liarities of the Timseus, Critias, and Laws. If account be taken 
of what I have ventured to call the technical words, the 
answer is clear. There is no dialogue which equally with 
these five combines the various elements of diction above- 
mentioned. In poetical and rhetorical words the Phsedrus 
can hardly be exceeded; but the number of words which 
occur only in the Phsedrus, Timseus, Critias, and Laws, is less 
in proportion than the number of those occurring only in the 
Sophist, Politicus, Timseus, Critias, and Laws; and considerably 
less than those confined to the Politicus, Timseus, Critias, and 
Laws, although slightly exceeding those found only in the 

Q Such as afiws, Legg. (5.); aPiaarros, Legg. (8.) ; advpw, Legg. (8.) ; aQuros, 

Tim. (5.) ; a./3ovAr)Tos, Legg. (a.) ; aye- Legg. (5.) 

yes, Tim. (a.) ; ayevvr\Tos, Tim. (a.); ay- r Such as (ppdfa, irepiexw, itepikay.- 

vevw, ayveia, Legg. (y.) ; ayxtiTTeto, fSduoi, p.eTpr\TM6s, air epyd(o/J.ai, fiero- 

Legg. (5.); aydivifffia, Legg. (5.) ; a8<e- X os > irpoaipeiffBat, i[i<pavi£a>, (pvAov, <pav- 

pewrjros Tim. (e.) ; aeupvyia, Legg. rd^eudai, an6cpacris, p7)dev, irp6<rprifxa, 

(e.); aQ\7}ixa, Legg. (3.); aOKw, Tim. the indefinite nor epos. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxxiii 

Sophist, Timiieus, Critias, and Laws. But, if the Phsedrua 
is treated as exceptional, there is no other dialoguo which 
equally with these approximates to the language of tho later 
dialogues, as measured by the number of words (in proportion 
to the number of pages) which the dialogue in question shares 
with the Timoous, Critias, or Laws, and with no other. The 
Sophist, which is neither physical nor ethical, but dialectical, 
and for this reason cannot be expected to abound in variety 
of words, is nearer to tho Timgeus, Critias, Laws, when tried by 
this test, than the Republic, which abounds in peculiar words, 
which is linked by the author to the Timasus, and whose gene- 
ral subject is closely similar to that of the Laws ; whilo the 
proportion of the Politicus is fivo times that of the Gorgias, 
and nearly ten times that of the Meno. The following table 
exhibits approximately the numerical ratios of the several dia- 
logues according to the number of words at once common and 
peculiar to each with the Thnaeus, Critias, and Laws : — 



Polit. I -j^. 


Phasdo j^. 




thyphr. Gorg. \ 


soph.; 

Polit. J y ' 


Symp. if. 




Euthyd. 4. 


Phileb. f. 




Critias 4- 


PhEedr. 14. 


Ion f . 




Parm.Hipp.Min. \ 


Soph. i^g-. 


Theast. f . 




Men. ^5. 


Rep. 4. 


Prot. Lach. 


Lys.i 


Ale. I. 4. 


Menex. 4 • 


Crat. Apol 


Eu- 


Charmid. ^. 



The position of the Parmenides in this list, like that of the Phai- 
drus, is partly accounted for by exceptional circumstances. 

§ 8. In grammar, structure of sentences, and rhythm, these 
dialogues present the same affinities which were found in ex- 
amining their vocabulary and general style. Bearing a certain 
resemblance to Plato's other writings generally, they approach 
most nearly to the Philebus, Timssus, Critias, and Laws. 

( 1 ) With respect to the grammar this remark will be seen 
to be justified by many parallel passages which have been col- 
lected in the notes to this edition. Of the following idioms 
several may be paralleled from other dialogues: some from 
other authors : but when taken together, they will be seen to 
be especially characteristic of the group thus indicated. 

s Considered as one continuous dialogue. For confirmation of these assertions, 
see Ast's Lexicon Platonicum. 

f 



xxxiv GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

i. The Ionic dative plural of the 2nd declension in <n occurs 
twice in the Politicus : 262 a. bntkaa(ot<Ti (MSS. with one ex- 
ception, ohti)) ; 304 e. tiro^voiaiv. Several instances of this 
form might, however, be collected from the Tima)us and Laws. 
It does not occur elsewhere in Plato. 

ii. Perfects with present (perhaps frcruicntative) meaning : 

eaiTovbaKa, Soph. 216, 251 c, 259 c; Ke'xprjpai, ib. 223 e; re- 
davpciKa, ib. 251 c. Compare TerevraKa, Rep. 7, 521 e, Tim. 
90 b. The so-called "aorist of custom" and the perf. pass, 
with middle signification are too common to require special 
mention here. 

iii. The participle is used with the auxiliary verb instead 
of one of the tenses of some other mood : 

Soph. 217 c. airapvrjOels yevrj ; ib. 229 d. iarlv 2\ov ; ib. 
235- a. e'x<ov Tvyyavei ; ib. 244 c. \6yov ovk av <-x ov (^ 0T "') 5 
ib. 245 c. yeviaOai — ov. ib. d. elXrj(pbs (pavelrai ; ib. 260 d. 
Z^apvov yeyovivai. Polit. 257 a. ciKrjKoores eiWi ; ib. 268 c. 
Ae'yozre? — rvyyavoijiev; ib. 306 b. eorov zypvT*} 

iv. The cognate accusative of the active becomes the subject 
of the passive voice. This extension of a common idiom occurs 
sometimes in tragedy, e. g. Sophocles, Trach. 169. tolovt ecppaCe 
irpbs 6eS>v eip.apju.eVa t&v 'Hpa/cAeiW kKTeXevraadai icovcav ( = tov 
'HpanXrj reAeuray rovs ttovovs Toiavra, cogn. ace). In the So- 
phist, where much has to be said of various processes, this form 
of expression is often found convenient, e.g. 221 a. to ttjs — 
TrXrjyfis — avaair^ixevov, " the stroke effected by an upward 
jerk ;" cf. Polit. 271 a. to e£ aXXrjXav — yevva>p.€vov. By a fur- 
ther extension of the same usage, the verbal noun in fj.a often 
means not the result of an act, but the act or process itself: so 
5?p\.top:a, Soph. 262 a ; yeWrjpa, ib. 266 e ; ptprjp:a Polit. 274 a ; 
and, as I venture to think, o-nipp.a, ib. 272 e. The case of 
8pe[xp.a, ib. 289 b, is even more peculiar ; here a transition is 
made from the act to the means by which the act is performed, 
just as often happens with the English verbal noun in ing 
(e. g. furnishings, trappings, dressing, &c.) . 

v. One instance at least occurs of the infinitive used for the 
imperative : Soph. 262 e. av pot (ppafciv. 

vi. And one of the imperative put interrogatively : 

* Periphrases are altogether more frequent : e. g. t/Aos exew. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxxv 

Polit. 295 0. |u?) ^eoro) 8?/ — ; Cf. Aeschin. iii. %\ t 8n 1)^6.- 
\ir\v [Ai] a~nohr]\Ai}(T(ii ; 

vii. Partitive genitives arc frequent : c. g. 

Soph. 265 a. T1JS KTT]TlKrjS. 

Polit. 281 e. t&v ahi&v. 

Cf. Phileb. 56 a. teal £vp,Tiacra avrys avkrjTLK'q; 

viii. Attraction, 

of an adverb, Polit. 263. 66ev=evTev6ev, ov. 
of a verb, Soph. 263. ws eoue — yiyvevQai^yiyverai, ojs 
iotKev. Cf. Phileb. 61 c. 

ix. Apposition, 

a. Sing, and plur. kv rravra, frequent here and in Phileb. 
Polit. 306 d e. t&xos koI crcpobpoTTjTa kclI o^vrrjra — avro. 

b. Femin. and neut. Soph, to p.ev novrfpta Kakovp,evov. 

c. Masc. and fem. or neut. (concrete and abstract), 

Polit. 259 d. 7TokiTLK7]V nai ttoXltlkou KCU j3aaiklK.T)V KO.I 

fiacnktubv — ly rtavra ravra. 

d. Of clauses, 

(i.) To each other, Polit. 257 d. ravra — nonqreov ovk ciito- 

crrariov. 
(ii.) To a demonstrative : frequently to be or to be ye. 

Soph. 244 a. to be tovtov yfyvrjrai irav rovvavriov. 

Polit. 263 d. to be ye — to\\ hv — biovop.a(oi. lb. 308 e. 

ravrov br'] ju.01 rov(? rj (BacnkiK^ (patverai, K.r.k. 
(iii.) To a relative, Soph. 227 c. onep ijpov, K.r.k. lb. 

236 d. o Se Kal tot rip,(peyv6ovv, K.r.k. 

x. The use of the neut. article with the genitive to express 
the abstract notion of a thing, is especially frequent in the 
Politicus and Laws. Polit. 263 c. to rqs airoirkav^aecos. lb. 
274 d, to rod pjvOov. 

xi. Ellipse (more frequent in the Sophist), 

a. Soph. 225 &• t<3 8e koyovs irpbs koyovs (yiyvop.£vu>). 
lb. 233 b. ]u.?jr' efyaivovro (6p9a>s avrikeyecv). 
lb. 235 b. bebeiKrai tolvvv (belv). 
lb. 238 c. pj} ov be (erretbav keyap.ev). 
lb. 248 e. to be {av (palev). 
Polit. 276 c. rt \J\v (ebei); — ekeyofiev (belv). 
lb. 301 b. TTpocnrotTJTaL be m 6 emaT'qp.oiv (apxew). 
f 2 



■i GENERAL [NTRODUCTION. 

b. Of to jxtv with to be following, 

Sopll. 221 0. VeVCTTlKOV /xtpOVS, TO 0£ TI(.(qV. 

lb. 267 b. veve\i-\\<jQu>, to oe p.eOeto-Oo). 

Polit. 291 c. n//oavz;/8i, to oe jda<n\iK^. Cf. Phileb. 36 e. 

\jfevbds, al b' aki]Ods — fjboval. Hence in Phileb. 66 c. 
emo-njixos, to?? 5' alaOi'jrreaw, should probably bo read 
i-nLo-T^ixais with corr. 2. Legg. passim. 

c. Of the apodosis after \xev, 
Soph. 240 b. ioiKus \xev. 

Polit. 311b. to 8' ev tcus irpagecnv to jxkv 6ia</>epoWcos.' 
to-xet. Cf. Rep. 455 e ; Symp. 207 d ; Theaot. 191c; 
Apol. 18 d. Cf. Horn. II. 22. 157. 
i. Pleonasm, 

a. Simple, of betv, Soph. 221 a. orrep npov6ep.eda Seu> e£ei>- 

p&v. Repetition of avros, Polit. 268 a (cf. the frag- 
ment of iEsch. in Rep. 2, 383 c) etvat, lb. 300 c. els 
hvva\xtv elvai. Comparative, lb. 288 b c. [xakXov — 

dp0OT€pOV. 

b. Redundant or explicit use of the participle, Soph. 225 a. 

8vo\xa \eyeiv — TiQep.evovs. lb. 229 e. w y^pStVTai, to. pCev 
yakenatvovTes, to, be ju.aA(9aK&>Te'pa)? "napay.vQovixevoi. lb. 
234 c. dboiXa Xeyop,eva. lb. 240 a. evl -npouei-nelv ovo- 
fjLCLTt. qb8ey£6.p.evos. lb. 243 b. <p6ey^rjTai Xeycov. lb. 
252 b. biaipovcnv — bio.ipovp.evoi. Polit. 274 e- r]p.apTo- 
fxev auo(pr]vd[xevoL. lb. 280 e. TeXeov XeXeyp,evov. Cf. 
Legg. 9, 879 d. etTe vaXca ivoiKovvros, e'bre ver/Xvbos 
CMpiyp-ivov. 
(N. B. There is a strong tendency to the use of participial 
expressions generally.) 

c. The same love of explicitness is shewn in the repeti- 

tion, with or without modification, of a verbal notion 
which has been already expressed or implied ; often 
causing a return from a more dependent to a less 
dependent construction, as from participle to infini- 
tive, infinitive to subjunctive, infinitive or subjunctive 
to indicative. Soph. 216 e. ToYe be o-o<pLo-Tal, totc be 
bo^av irapdo-xoLVT av. lb. 225 c. a/xcpicr/fyTeirai fxev v 
aTe^vm be. — irepl ovto irpaTTeiai.. lb. 243 a. yaXeTiOV, 
koX TrArj/x/xeAes e-niTip.av. lb. 246 d. Tioieiv — ■noiQ>p.ev. 
lb. 248 c. Xeyovcrtv 8ri — p.iv — be — (pu<r£v. Polit. 263 d. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxxvii 

•npoaztiTOi, lb. 293 e. p.ep,ipS]aOai. lb. 299 d. Ozacrai- 
p.eOa. lb. 302 c. e(j)ap.ev. Cf. Symp. 177c; Apol. 1 9 0. 

xiii. Ylpbs to o-rjjxaivop.evov. 

The sentence is sometimes continued as if a word in 

composition were fully expressed. 
Soph. 219 a. artyyov, aXXrjV be bvvap.iv eyov. 
lb. 249 d. rcS — </)t\ocro0a) teal Tavra fxaXiara tijjmvtl. 
Cf. Legg. J, 8lO a. (piXojJLaOovvTL p.t]be luaovvri. 
xiv. " Pendent" constructions. 

Of the nom tJ Soph. 247 C. vav 6 p.rj bvvarol — elaCv, 00s apa 
tovto . Polit. 303 c. tovto \xev areyj>m axrirep bpapa 

K.T.X. 

Gen. with irepl, Soph. 258 e. Trepl kvavriov twos — yalpeiv 

Xeyopev. 
Dat., Polit. 295 e. rw be to. bUaia — k.t.X. 
Ace, Polit. 295 d. Trav to toiovtov ^vpfialvov — ye'Acos av 6 

lieyicrTos yiyvoiTO t&v tolovtojv vopLoOeTtjixaTcov. lb. 282 e. 

to p,ev oLTpoiKT^ — oaa hi ye av — . lb. 283 a. to ye nj? 

vcpavTLKris p<tpo$ — . lb. 306 c.'QgvTrjTa koI ra^os — . With 

Ttapa, lb. 300 b. Trapa yap olpai tovs vop.ovs — . 

xv. The construction as well as the diction is often varied 
in successive clauses. 

Soph. 248 b. ye^e'eret — Trpbs ovcriav. lb. 244 d. ?} p,rjbevbs — 
ei be tlvos. lb. 245 c. re — xal p.r)i> — ye. 

xvi. The subject of the inversion of words belongs rather to 
the structure of sentences than to grammar. But it may be 
well in this place to call attention to the frequency of hyper- 
baton, especially in the use of particles. E. g. Soph. 263 c. 
ecpapev — irov. lb. d. p.ivTOL. lb. 264 a. OTav — av. 

Several of these modes of expression, such as the redundant 
participle, the use of the auxiliary verb, and the extension of 
the cognate accusative, not to mention the Ionic dative plural, 
and the peculiar effects of attraction, are in the manner of 
tragedy; and we may therefore be the less surprised at such 
directly tragic forms of expression as Soph. 238 a. pL-q-noo p,ey 
eiTTrjs. lb. 235 a. vvv vp-irepov epyov i]br\ tqv 6rjpa p.r\KeT avelvai. 
lb. 229 e. apxcuoTTpeiris tl iraTpiov. lb. 235 d. ov p,rj Trore exepvybv 
errev^Tai, or such "pregnant" constructions as in Polit. 271 a. 
abrjXov — 8tec/)#eipero. Cf. Legg. II, 926 b. paivop,eva Krjbevpara. 



xxxviii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

(2) It may bo remarked generally with regard to the 
structure of tho sentences in these dialogues, that they are 
more elaborate and also more irregular than in the greater 
number of Plato's writings. They have less of the sponta- 
neous movement of conversation, and in the Politicus especially 
are often more redundant and complicated. While the reader's 
car is filled with a peculiar stately rhythm, his attention is 
quickened by artificial or poetical collocations of words. These 
traits are clearly marked in the dialogues before us ; they 
may be traced also in the Philebus and some parts of the 
Phsedrus, and they are eminently characteristic of the Laws. 

Note for example the elaborateness and balanced formality 
of the following replies : 

Soph. 217 a. ri 8e fxaXia-Ta Kal to txoiov nepl avr&v biaTro- 

prjdels epeuQai bievoijQrjs ; 
lb. 224 c. kcu tl tls av dXXo elirvv ovk c\v ttA 17/^X067 TtXi]V 

to vvv ^r\rovp.evov avTo elvaL to crocpLcrTLKov yevos ', 
lb. 226 b. to ttoHop nepl clvtQv (3ovXrjdels brjXaxiaL, ■napabeiy- 

[xcvra Trpodeh Tama KaTa ttcivtcov fjpov ; 
lb. 234 b. ovbap.G>s' irdp.TioXv yap elprjKas ethos els ev ■navra 

avXXa/3o)v Kal a^ebbv iroiKiXdiTaTOV. 
Polit. 262 c. ■ndiov ovv brj <ppa£eLs hiaipovp.ivovs r)p.ds ovk 

6p6a>s apTi bpav ; 
lb. 270 b. (paiveTaL y ovv brj Kal jxdka et/co'reos dprjcrOai irdvTa 

ocra bieXijXvOas. 
lb. 277 a. Kal KLvbvvevei y\ & £eVe, TeXecos av ijjuv ovtohs 

e\eLV 1] 7T€pl TOV TToXiTLKOV CLTlobeL^lS. 

lb. 284 e. /cat jieya y eK&Tepov Tp.r)p,a cures, Kal tsoXv bta- 
tpepov aXXrjXoiv. 
Compare with these Phil. 29 d. tls yap a-noKpiv6\xevos dkkos 
vyiaivcdv av hots, (paveirj ; lb. 32 d. 'Op0orara keyeLs otl TavTrj 7777 
Set biaitopzv&rjvai to vvv p.eTabL(aKop.evov. lb. 47 c. TldvTa, a> 2w- 
KpaTes, to. crvpLfiaivovTa npbs tQ>v irokk&v dv6pu>iru)V ds bogav bee- 
Ttipavas. Tim. 29 d. "Aptora, 00 Ttjuate, iravTa-nao-i re as KekeveLS 
cnrobeKTeov to jikv ovv Ttpooifiiov cov davpLaaMS direbe^dp-edd aov, 
tov be brj Xoyov r)\uv e<fie£rjs nepatve. Legg. I, p. 627 c. Kal p.dka 
cltottov, 3) $eve, to vvv Xeyop.evov, o/xws b opLokoyelv ovtcos dvay- 
KaioTaTov. lb. 628 c. Ovtco iras av e9eXoi irporepov r) Ketvm irepl 
Trjv aiiTov yiyvevOai itoXiv. lb. 639 c. iravTairaai Tiva Trovrjpbv 
keyeis, Kal ovbapi&s dvbpG>v apxovra, dXXd tlvcov vtyobpa yvvaiK&v. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xxxix 

In these and numberless other places thcru is easily recog- 
nised the presence of a common typo. The same careful 
precision is observable in the cxplicitncss with which a ques- 
tion is often stated. See Soph. 218 c; 230 b, c, d; 248 d, e; 
265 c ; Folit. 262 c, d, e ; 293 a, b ; and compare Phil. 12 c, d ; 
15 b, c ; 18 b, c, d, and Legg. 637. 

Instances of redundancy and complication, of a somewhat 
harsher kind than those of the Phsedrus, Gorgias, or Republic, 
arising more from lengthiness than fulness, will soon enough 
become familiar to the student of these dialogues. Meanwhile 
the following passages may be taken as samples : Soph. 230 
c, d; Polit. 288 d, 293 b, 298 c, d, 309 b. Compare Phil. 
17 d, e ; Legg. 716 b, 740 d, 779 d. Such irregularities are 
especially frequent in the Politicus and Laws. 

In point of rhythm and the collocation of words, these 
dialogues hold, with the Philebus, an intermediate place be- 
tween the Pheedrus (to which may here be added the Theae- 
tetus and Republic) and the Timaeus, Critias, and Laws. 

Every reader of Plato is acquainted with the poetic cadences, 
which in his more highly wrought passages he occasionally 
introduces, not without a smile at his own magnificence. In 
the myths especially (to use his own words), he speaks with 
a tragic air, as if telling a tale impressively to children. (Rep. 
8, 545 e. eux.coiJ.e6a reus Movacus direlv fjjjuv cc "0 77(77) cos 8r) irpco- 
tov crracrts e/xrrfcre," kcu cpconev avras rpayiKCos, cos 7rpos iralbas 
rjfjias irai^ovaas /cat epecrxTjAoucras, cos St) enrovhrj Xeyovcras v^\rrjXo- 
Xoyovixivas Aeyeiv ;) Examples will readily occur from the 
Protagoras, Symposium, Theaetetus (172—177), and the con- 
clusion of the Republic (where note especially the speech of 
Lachesis). It appears from the Phsedrus that these harmonies 
were not unconscious. The Socrates of that dialogue is sur- 
prised to find himself discoursing in this unwonted strain. 
When the afflatus of the higher rhetoric first descends on 
him, he says, " I am speaking almost in dithyrambs/'' and 
afterwards, when he breaks out into a verse in the epic 
metre, he remarks on this as shewing a further access of 
enthusiasm. The ironical shyness with which he at first ex- 
ercises his suddenly acquired gift wears off as he proceeds, 
and in the second long speech, or " palinode," he evidently 
"forgets that they are at play." Both speeches, besides 



xl GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

such mock-poetical turns as £vp.p.ot. XafteaOe tov pvOov, — r.a- 
piTe bij, Opeppara yevvaxa, KaXXi-naibd re <\>albpov -neLQeTe, aro 
full of a sententious solemnity and rich music, to which the 
choice and arrangement of the words contribute largely. 
The following single phrases will partly illustrate this : 246 d. 
6 pXv bij p.eyas fjyep.ihv ev ovpavu Zeus, eXavvotv T7Ti]vbv apjxa, 
TtpSnos iropeveTai. 247 a. tG>v dXXojv ocrot ev rcj> tG>v bubeica 
api0p<2 TeraypLevoi Oeol ap^ovTes. lb. b. ditpai' vtto tt]v vttov- 
pdviov &\J/Z8a TTOpevuvrai, irpbs dvavTes 7/877. lb. fipiOei yap 6 T?pi 
KaK??? iTf-n-09 p-ere^v. lb. 248 b. iroXXal p.ev yjuXevovTai, ■noXXol 
be iroXXa TTTepa Opavovrai, iraaat be noXvv eypvcrai ttovov areXels 
rrjs tov ovtos 6eas a-nepyovTai — where the alliteration also adds 
to the effect. 

The music of language, thus half-humorously struck out, 
seems to have had an increasing fascination for Plato, and 
sounds on unreservedly in his latest works. In the Tirnaeus 
and Laws these tragic and " dithyrambic" cadences are no 
longer occasional, but perpetual, and the speaker does not 
now "veil his face" with Socratic irony while uttering them. 
There appears an increasing preference for balanced phrases 
and "good mouth-filling" words. The rhythm, however, while 
more laboured, is less varied and less instinct with movement 
and life. The following examples are taken almost at random. 

Tim. 41 e. Scot be arrapeicras clvtcls els ra irpoarjuovra eK&aTcus 
e'/cacrra opyava \povov (pvvai ^wcoi' to 6eocrefBe<JTaTOV. lb. 47 b. 
raXXa be, ocra eXaTTco, tL av vp.volp.ev ; S>v 6 pJr) cpiXocrocpos rut/JAco- 
dels obvpop-evos av Oprjvoi p.aT7Jv. Legg. ] , 644 b. bel bi] ti]v 
Traibeiav p.r]bap.ov aTip\a(eiv, m irp&Tov t&v KaXXtorcnv tols aptarois 
avbpacn Tiapayiyvop.evov. lb. 2, 6$$ d. 6eol be olKTeipavres to 
tw d>0pw-nw e-n'movov ire^VKOs yivoq. lb. 654 e. pL&raios 6 p,eTu 
Tao0' fjpuv i:ep\ iraibeias opdr\<$ elff 'EXX-qvLKrjs ehe (3apfiapt,Ki]s 
Xoyos av elrj. lb. 66 1 b. to brj TeXos airdarjs paKaptoTrjTOS elvai 
to TavTa neKT-qpLevov aOavaTov elvai yevop,evov 6 u Tax}.o-Ta. lb. 
3, 677 e. pcvpiav piev riva (pofiepav epr\p.iav, yrjs be acpOovov TtXr\- 
60s Trdp-TToXv, ((aw be t&v aXXvv eppovTcav /3ovkoXl ajra, Kal el 
t( hov aly&v irepiXeicpOev yevos. lb. 7, 824 a. 77 tS>v bia-navp-ara 
iroVwi' expvera. lb. 8. 831 e. tov <payeiv TravTobaira Kal Tiieiv 
ojcraTJrcos Kal afypobiamv naaav tt&vtvs irapao-yelv TtXr]o-p.ovrjV. 
lb. 842 e. avayKaiov vop.odeTovvTa eari Tpeireadat. lb. 4, 716 a, 
b, 9, 854 a, 878 b, 11, 919 a, b. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xli 

If wo turn now to the Philobus, Sophist, and Politicus, we 
shall find a rhythm less inflated and monotonous than that of 
the Laws, less free and various than that of the Pluedrus, but 
essentially resembling both. If the cadences of the Phsedrus 
have a dithyrambic wildness, and thoso of the Laws are 
oratorical rather than poetical, these would most aptly be com- 
pared to the refined moderation and calm statclincss of Attic 
tragedy. So far as a thing of this kind can be reduced to 
rule, the artifices by which the effect is secured are chiefly 
two: (i) The careful balancing of words so as to relieve the 
tediousness of a lengthened phrase, by the counterposition of 
noun and epithet, verb and participle, subject and object, and 
by the alternation of emphatic and unemphatic words ; (2) 
The adjustment of long and short syllables so as to quicken or 
retard the movement of the sentence. (That this is no mere 
fancy may be gathered from the re-introduction of the Ionic 
dat. plur. in 01.) Sometimes short syllables are accumulated 
as in choric metres : more often a sentence is concluded with 
an Iambic hemistich, or with a dochmiac, each generally ter- 
minating with a dissyllable, which is often divorced from the 
immediate context. But there is something beyond this 
unconscious mechanism, which can be discovered by the ear 
alone. A very few instances out of many are all that can be 
quoted here. 

Soph. 218 d. et pv>] (tv iroOev euireTeorepai' e^eis zIttuv aWrjv 
oSdc. 234 d. kcu ixavTa TtavTt] avaTtrpcufidai ra kv rots Ao'yots 
(})avTd<r[xaTa into t&v kv rat? Tipa^ecriv €pya>v irapayevopLevav. 
242 a. Tj to irapairav iariov, et touto tXs tlpyil bpdv oWos. 259 d. 
oin-e tls eXeyxos ovtos ak-qOivos, apri re t&v ovtmv tlvos ecpa-nro- 
fxivov brjkos veoyevrjs &v. 

Polit. 26 1 e. Tt\ovcria>T€po5 ei? to yrjpas avacpavrjcreL (ppovr\- 
aem. lb. tt]V oe aytkcuoTpotpLKrjv dp' ivvoch irf] rt? btbv[xov 
anocprivas r6 (r}ToviLevov kv biirkaaioLcn ravvv iv rots fjpuo-etriv els 
Tore 7rot?/(ret (flTtlcrdai. 268 b. ovk akkos Kpeirrcoy iiapapcvdeicrOat 
/cat Kr)\S>v Tipavve.iv juera re opyav&v k.cu \jnk<2 ro3 aro'/xart tt]V 
tt]s amov Tro[p.vi]s aptara //eraxeioi^Oju.ez'o? p.ovmKi]v. 269 d. rots 
TtuvTcav OetoTaTois 7Tjoocr?]/cet fjLoi/6i§. 270 a. tot€ b OTav avedfj, 
8V kavTov amov Uvai, koto, Katpbv acpzQivTa tolovtov, wcrre ava- 
Tiakiv iropzveo-Oai irokkas irepiobav p,vpiabas but to p-iyicnov ov 
kcu laoppoTto>TaTov eiri //eyforou fidivov irobbs Uvai. 273 d. 8to 
g 



xlii GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

dri tot ijbi] Oebs o Kovfxijvas avrov, KaOopdv ev airopLaLS ovra, 
KrjbS[i€VOS tva fxi'i xdixdrrOeU ei? rbv rfjs bp.o lot 7]TO 9 aireipov ovtcl 
tottoc bmj, -nahXv ec/>c%>o? avrov tG>v -nqhaXmv yiyv6p.cvo$, ro 
vo(Ti](ravTa Kal \v9evra kv rfj na& kavrbv Trporepq, we/Hooto orrpo//as, 
Koap.el re Kal k-navopQ&v uddvarov clvtov kcll ayijpoiv airepyaftTaL. 
(This is almost in the manner of the Timseus and Laws.) 
]Ol ol. C7rei yevojitvov y av olov \4yop.ev dyaTracrOai re av Kal 
oIkclv hLaKvfiepvwvTa eiiSai/xoVco? 6p0i)v d/cpi/3co? p.6vov rroKLrdav. 
309. BtLav kv haip.ovm y[yvea9aL yivei. 

The following are selected from many parallel examples in 
the Philebus. 18 d. tovtov rbv beapLov av KoyLadfxevos cos ovra 
era Kal TTCLvra ravra eV 7rco? noiovvra, \iiav eV avroLs cos ovaav 
ypapL/JLaTLKip riyvtiv €77€(p0iy£aTO irpoa-eLTtow. 45 d. to be rcor 
a(pp6v(0V re Kal vfipLaT&v pe'x/H p.av(as rj o-(pobpa rjbovi] Kareyovaa 
TTepLJBorjTovs <XTr<zpya(eTai. 4.6 b. ctu|j.|juktoi' tovto y dp u> 2)co- 
Kpares, eWe yiyveo-Qai tl ko.k6v. (Where there is *a manifest 
approach to the structure of an Iambic line : o~vp\p.LKrov ap eWe 
yLyveadai KaKov u .) 66 b. Trpwrov pikv irepl p.irpov Kal to p-irpLov 
Kal irdvra OTToo-a XPV roLavra vop,l(€LV tijv a'CbLov rjpfjo-dal abvo-lv. 
67. Kal robs 6-qpicov epcoras olovTai Kvpiovs eirai p,dprvpas p.dKKov 
rj tovs kv Movo-jj (pLkoaocfxi) ^ep^avrevpevcav l/cacrrore Koyojv. 

Whatever may be thought of a matter which depends so 
much on individual impressions as this of rhythm, there can 
be no question that the transposition of words from their 
natural sequence, either for the sake of sound or emphasis, 
which was noticed occasionally in the Thesetetus, Appendix A. 
p. 218, becomes more frequent in these dialogues. See, for 
instance, the hyperbaton of vvv in p. 218 b, and two other 
places of the Sophist; and Polit. 268 e (rroAAd — hy\), 2j6 c 
(eTnpe'Aeia — Kal — riyv-q), 280 d (ocrat re irepl rds kXottcls Kal rds 
/3ia 7rpd£ets Sia/ccoAuriKa tpya irapexovraL re'x/'cu (ppaypdrcov x ) . 

In more than one passage this has been the chief source of 
difficulty to interpreters. Nor will it be denied that the same 
symptom of laborious and artificial arrangement reappears with 
increased frequency in the Laws. 

u Cf. Polit. 300 a. rod krkov rod wpSaOiv fj-el^ov en tovto yiyvoiro kixk6v : sug- 
gesting the line too irp6o-9e nti(ftv tovto ylyveTai ko.k6v. 
x Soph. 253 c. Sia TtdvTcnv el (for el 5ia ■kolvtwv). 

lb. e. lSe7v /j.ev xaAe7rbi> evapyoi? Kal tovtov. 

Polit. 260 c. Trjs £wiTa.KTLKrJ9 ws ovto. avTbv t£x v7 I s - 

lb. 27O C. T0ls iVTOS Tlu'lV OlKOVfftV O.VT0V. 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. iliii 

§ 9. The relation of our two dialogues to the Philebus on 
the one hand, and on the other to the Timacus and Laws, which 
is indicated by this general survey of their scope, method, 
style and diction, and may perhaps be confirmed when each is 
oxamined separately, contains the answer to the question raised 
by Socher, Are these dialogues Platonic or Antiplatonic 1 

The single point of authorship is iudccd sufficiently decided 
by three references of Aristotle (Met. vi. 2, § 3, 1026 B, Ato 

Ylk&TWV TpoTTOV TiVa OV KaKtoS T7]V aO(f)L(TTLKr]l> TT€pl TO fJLT] ov 

fragev: ib. xi. 8, 1064 B; xii. 2, 1089 C), and in reference to 
the Sophist few Platonic scholars will not feel the force of 
Dr. Thompson's words (Genuineness of the Sophista, p. 5) : 
" So far as the mere style is concerned, there is no dialogue 
in the whole series more thoroughly Platonic. In their 
structure the periods are those of Plato, and they are unlike 
those of any other writer. Throughout, it seems to me, the 
author is writing his very best. His subject is a dry one ; 
and he strives to make it palatable by a more than ordinary 
neatness of phrase, and by a sustained tone of pleasantry. 
His style is terse or fluent, as terseness or fluency is re- 
quired : but the fluency never degenerates into laxity, nor the 
terseness into harshness. The most arid dialectical wastes 
are refreshed by his humour : and bloom in more places 
than one with images of rare brilliancy and felicity. Few 
besides Plato would have thought of describing the endless 
wrangling of two sects (?) who had no principle in common, 
under the image of a battle between gods and giants; and. 
fewer still, had they conceived the design, would have ex- 
ecuted it with a touch at once so firm and so fine. What 
inferior master could have kept up so well and with so little 
effort, the fiction of a hunt after a fierce and wily beast, by 
which the Eleatic stranger sustains the ardent Thesetetus amid 
the toil and weariness of a prolonged logical exercitation ? 
Or who could so skilfully have interwoven that exercitation 
itself with matter so grave and various as that of which the 
dialogue in its central portion is made up ? If vivacity in the 
conversations, easy and natural transitions from one subject to 
another, pungency of satire, delicate persiflage, and idiomatic 
raciness of phrase are elements of dramatic power, I know no 
dialogue more dramatic than the Sophistes/'' 
2 2 



mu GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 

But the objections of Soulier are not thus met, or rather the 
difficulties which he raised arc not explained. And yet the 
solution of them may contribute something towards a theory 
of these dialogues, and may even throw some light on the 
history of Plato's mind. 

i. Sochcr objects first that the dichotomies, unlike the divi- 
sions of the Gorgias and Philcbus, arc meaningless, arbitrary, 
accidental, and tastelessly prolonged. It has been shewn that 
division as a logical exercise was at one time rife in the school 
of Plato ; that the use of that exercise here is propaedeutic and 
provisional ; and that the method while used is also criticized, 
modified, and partly rejected : that its use here is not more 
singular than that of etymologies in the Cratylus : and that 
as the Cratylus vein recurs occasionally in. these dialogues, so 
traces of the method of dichotomies appear in the Laws. The 
use of the method is also seen to be an approach to Aristotle, 
who makes use of some of the divisions which are here in- 
vented. 

%. " The absence of humour, seen especially in the gravity 
with which trivial examples are worked out." Whatever may 
be thought of the humour of these dialogues, they are not less 
humorous than the Timseus and Laws. And whoever misses 
humour in them, will probably find the same want in the 
greater part of the Philebus. Soche^s objection is really 
based on the prominence which is given in these dialogues — 
and also in the Philebus and Parmenides, and in a different 
way in the Laws — to the idea of method. And it may be 
retorted that the " gravity" is often that of the accomplished 
humorist, who does not " himself laugh, to set on some 
quantity of barren spectators to laugh too/'' 

3. "Plato identifies Being with the ideas; Not-Being with 
the objects of sense: the object of opinion being intermediate. 
(Rep. v. 477-480.) The Eleatie Stranger takes no account of 
this absolute antithesis of Being and Not-Being. Being, with 
him, is the sum of all positive notions. Plato, on the other 
hand, takes no account of the logical antithesis or correlation 
of Being and Not-Being." 

4. " Further, the Sophist contains a criticism of the Platonic 
doctrine of Ideas." 

These cardinal objections can only be fully met in the sepa- 
rate Introduction to the Sophist, Meanwhile the reader 



GENERAL INTRODUCTION. xlv 

may be asked to bear in mind what has been already said of 
Plato's modification of his theory of Knowledge, and the un- 
doubted approximation to the Aristotelian point of view which 
appears in the Philebus, Timseus, and Laws. And we may notice, 
as a discrepancy of the same kind, the final rejection in the 
Thesetetus of a definition of Knowledge, which might well bo 
thought essentially Platonic, namely, " True opinion able to 
give a reason of itself" (S6£a aKiiQ)js juera Koyov). 

5. To the Politicus, besides the general grounds (1 and 2), 
Socher objects that the political notions here advanced are not 
in harmony with the Republic, and still less with earlier dia- 
logues. The examination of this point must also be reserved : 
but we are in a position to remark that there is a third case 
not put by Socher, viz. Is the Politicus intermediate between 
the Republic and the Laws ? 

6. Lastly, he observes that the idea of the Divine Govern- 
ment, implied in the mythical description of the Saturnia 
regna, is wholly unlike what appears in the Phsedo, Republic, 
Tima3us, and Laws : with which the notion of God ever leaving 
the helm of the universe is wholly irreconcilable. The signifi- 
cance of this remark will be developed, when the Politicus is 
considered separately. At present it may be enough to point 
to the well-known passage in the tenth book of the Laws 
(896 e), where an independent evil soul is postulated in order 
to account for evil ; with which compare Rep. 2, 379 c, "God, 
since he is good, cannot be the cause of all things, as most 
men say, but of what happens to mankind little is due to him, 
and there is much of which he is not the cause : for our good 
is much less than our evil." 

Each of Socher's objections, although inconclusive, arose 
from the perception of some real peculiarity, of which those 
who maintain the genuineness of these dialogues are bound 
to give account. It will appear in the sequel, whether any 
light is thrown upon this subject, when they are viewed, as by 
the indications of style and diction we have been led to view 
them, in especial connexion with the Thesetetus, Philebus, 
TimaBus, Critias, and Laws. 



INTRODUCTION TO THE SOPHIST. 



OF the title given to this dialogue by the early grammarians, 
2,o(picrT7}9, rj Trepi rod ovtos, AoyiKo'?, the name Sophistes is so 
far acknowledged by Plato himself, as in an allusion to it 
which occurs in the succeeding dialogue, the form of referenco 
used is kv rc3 o-o<^6aTr) a : i.e. "in discussing or defining the 
Sophist." And nothing can be more explicit than the manner 
in which this subject is proposed for definition in the opening 
scene. Yet it may not unnaturally appear to many readers 
that the remaining words, although of less authority, describe 
more accurately the real subject of the dialogue, in which, it 
may be thought, either two distinct inquiries are sought to be 
combined by a tour de force, or the former of these is only 
the occasion, excuse, or starting-point for the latter. 

The questions which occupy the largest and certainly the 
most important place are concerned with the nature of nega- 
tion, the relativity of ideas, and the defects of early speculation 
on the idea of Being. 

It may not seem obvious why these metaphysical questions 
should be necessarily involved in the study of a class of per- 
sons whose procedure and influence was a matter of historical 
fact ; or, again, supposing it necessary to raise and discuss 
such difficulties, why they might not have been equally sug- 
gested by some other example. We should bear in mind, 
first, the extremely abstract and general manner in which 
Plato looks at every problem ; the rarity of the metaphysical 
atmosphere in which he lived. Rightly or wrongly, he passed 
at once from the simplest to the deepest matters of thought : 

a Such an aUusion to a previous dialogue is rare in Plato, and can hardly be 
paralleled except from the Timaeus and Laws. 



INTRODUCTION TO THE SOPHIST. xlvii 

like one possessed with a great passion, " examples, gross as 
earth/' suggested to him the same themes, always old and 
always new. Just as, in the Philebus, the distinction of 
pleasures into good and bad suggests the problem of the one 
and the many, the description of the Sophist as a " phantastic 
artist" raises the whole question of the existence of the appa- 
rent beside the real. But, secondly, the connexion of thought, 
though at first sight remote, is, in this case at least, far from 
being arbitrary or accidental. As the question is a cardinal 
one, so is the instance by which the question is introduced. 
Plato is not merely clothing an ontological discussion in the 
garb of flesh and blood : it is at least equally true that in the 
ontological problem he sums up the difficulties of life and 
experience in the most abstract form : difficulties and con- 
tradictions which he had elsewhere illustrated with dramatic 
power. And the name Sophistes itself expresses a provisional 
generalization, or vindemiatio prima. As in the Theaetetus, 
the theory " Each man the measure of truth to himself" is the 
most general expression for all opinion that is not founded 
in reason, so the Sophist, even before definition, is, as he is 
described in the Republic, only the conscious reflection and 
embodiment of ordinary thought. 

The fact remains, however, that the dialogue is naturally 
divided into two main portions, one of which is enclosed or 
embedded in the other. In the opening and concluding passages 
(I.) an attempt is made to form a definite conception of the 
genus Sophist by the method of dichotomies, i. e. through 
logical divisions to follow the ramifications of the tree of know^- 
ledge till the particular branch which supports him is dis- 
covered. But there is a point (p. 236 d) at which this series 
of divisions is interrupted by what is formally a long digres- 
sion, but really the most serious part of the whole (II.), where 
instead of dividing and subdividing, the mind is carried up to 
reconsider the first principles on which this method of distinc- 
tions, and all criticism and controversy, rest ; in other words, 
to examine the meaning of negation, which cannot be deter- 
mined without also examining the nature of positive concep- 
tions. When this question has been set at rest, the divisions 
are resumed (p. 264 b), and a definition is obtained, in which 
the interlocutors acquiesce with more satisfaction than is 






xlviii INTRODUCTION 

usually expressed at the conclusion of a Socratic dialogue. 
It will bo convenient to treat these portions separately. 

In I. the problem is presented in the concrete, but still 
in a very general aspect. According to the habit of Socratic 
induction it is assumed that the name Sophist, though applied 
to a great variety of persons, has one meaning, which may 
be ascertained by a process of definition : just as the word 
'angler,' which is defined as a preliminary example, has one 
meaning which can be clearly conceived and expressed. A 
modern respondent might have questioned this assumption 
at the outset, and have challenged Socrates to prove that the 
word had the same meaning when applied to the poets by 
Pindar, to the geometers by Socrates himself, to Zeno who 
denied motion, to the Heracliteans who denied all else, to the 
philologer Frodicus, and the astronomer Hippias, to Gorgias 
who ignored speculative truth, and to Protagoras who held 
every proposition to be of equal value. The possibility of 
such a doubt does not occur to Plato. He has in his mind a 
very simple, but a very sweeping distinction, for which the 
names <ro<£to-T7)s and ^uAo'o-o^o? afforded the most convenient 
expression : a distinction which occurred to him when he com- 
pared Socrates with other teachers, and which it was the work 
of his life to make clear to himself and others. This was the 
distinction between real and apparent Knowledge ; the real 
knowledge which Socrates sought, and the apparent know- 
ledge which the others professed. In the Phsedrus and Gorgias 
he had shewn that the so-called art of rhetoric had no scien- 
tific basis : in the Protagoras and Meno, that the virtue which 
was commonly praised and which the public teachers professed 
to give was the result of habit and common opinion and not 
of principle : in the Euthydemus, he had ridiculed the process 
of mere verbal argument as contrasted with the real treatment 
of logical difficulties: in many places he had satirized the 
practice of receiving fees for teaching. The present inquiry is 
more general than any of these; and is also restricted to the 
consideration of the Sophist in the highest and most technical 
sense, in which he is distinguished from the rhetorician and other 
artists, as the professor of knowledge and teacher of virtue. 
It was only in this aspect that the Sophist could compete with 
the philosopher. The name might be applied to particular 



TO THE SOPHIST. xlix 

artists, such as the poet or geometer, hut only incidentally , 
and their partial claims were ahsorhed in the universal pic- 
tensions of the Sophist par excellence. Further, those pre- 
tensions are here idealized : for it is doubtful whether even 
Gorgias or llippias, who were ready to answer all comers, 
carried their professions to the extent described in pp. 232,233. 
The neai-cst approach to an equally general statement of the 
question is made in the Protagoras, pp.312 b — 314 c, where 
Hippocrates is told that he is going to give his mind up to a 
Sophist without knowing what a Sophist is. " It is not enough 
to know that he is an artist, without knowing what is his par- 
ticular work." (p. 312 c, d, e.) " Perhaps he is a merchant or 
retail-dealer in the food of the mind. Take care that he does 
not cheat us by praising his wares. For, if we buy them, we 
cannot examine them, until we have received them in our own 
persons either for good or ill b ." (pp. 313 c — 314 b. Compare 
Soph. 223, 224.) Here there is the same assumption, which 
appears in the " Sophist," that the common name implies a 
common nature. But the analysis of the conception is carried 
only a little way, and the characteristic chosen is external 
merely, (a sufficient answer to those who suspect these dialogues 
because the grounds of distinction which are adopted in them 
are sometimes superficial). 

To return. Although no doubt is entertained that there is 
a common nature answering to the name Sophist, this nature 
is, however, by no means easily found. " The creature is wily 
and dangerous, and must be hunted with caution and good 
heed." " He is not to be caught with one hand : we must lay 
our snares in every path, till we have surrounded him." 
Whether or not the task was rightly chosen, it was no mean 

b Other scattered hints respecting (19 e), where the itinerant habits of the 

the Sophists are found in the Meno, Sophist are said to disqualify him for the 

where Anytus, who abhors them, can- task of conceiving the true state in act : 

not tell what they are, but knows that in the Thesetetus, where it is said that 

they are the ruin of their pupils : to those who have " no need of Socrates," 

which Socrates replies, " Perhaps there i. e. no genuine impulse towards philo- 

is something in that" (kcu "i<rws ti Ae- sophy, " may profit by the converse of 

yeis) : in the Republic, where they are Prodicus, or of other wise and Heaven- 



more as an effect than as a taught men :" and in the Gorgias (520), 

cause, as the mere reflectors of popular where Socrates asserts that it is diffi- 

opinion, only teaching men what they cult to distinguish the Rhetor from the 

desire to be taught : in the Timeeus Sophist. 



1 INTRODUCTION 

effort of generalization, to include in one notion persons so 
different as Protagoras and Ilippias, and still more to embrace 
the versatile activity of any of them in one description. This 
meant little else than to express in one formula the intellectual 
spirit of the age. Plato shews his consciousness of this diffi- 
culty, and at the same time finds an occasion for satire, by 
giving four distinct classifications, according to each of which 
the Sophist may be referred to a different genus, while even 
under the same genus it is not always clear to which of the 
lesser species he belongs. To begin with the most obvious 
characteristic, all art having been first divided into acquisi- 
tive and creative, the Sophist is seen to angle for rich young 
men, and is accordingly ranged with the angler under the 
art of hunting, or catching by guile, which is one of the two 
main branches of appropriation without consent : which was 
previously distinguished from acquisition by contract. This 
aspect of him is treated playfully. He is the congener of the 
angler, with whom he parts company when they reach the art 
of hunting live things — the Sophist turning to rich meadow- 
lands of youth, which are irrigated by rivers of wealth. There 
he pursues, not like other huntsmen a wild, but a tame quarry, 
(at least if man is tame) : nor this, as kidnappers and warriors 
do, by force, but by persuasion. And he persuades, not like 
the lawyers, in public, but in private : not like the lover, at his 
own expense, but for reward : and this, not like the flatterer's 
reward, a bare maintenance from hand to mouth, but in the 
form of money. (218 c — 223 b.) 

This last touch is made the basis of a new line of definition, 
starting from the other main branch of acquisition, viz. ex- 
change. According to this, the Sophist is a merchant of 
mental wares : which may be either taken at second-hand and 
exported from city to city, in which case the Sophist is an 
itinerant trader ; or he may be a retail dealer, or a manu- 
facturer, in his own city. (223 c— 224 e c .) 

Plato next fixes on a characteristic of a less trivial kind, to 
which he refers afterwards as the most essentially distinctive of 
those which have been put forward. The Sophist talks, as has 
been said, to men in private on a great variety of topics ; but 
his conversations have one feature in common. They are con- 

c It is curious that paid teaching as re-admitted to Plato's favour in the 
well as the " Rhetoric of Nestor" are Laws. 



TO THE SOPHIST. li 

trovcrsial. He is a controversialist and a teacher of the art 
of controversy. This brings him under the remaining branch 
of acquisition without consent, namely, forcible acquisition or 
contention : the art of open, as opposed to that of secret, appro- 
priation. Not that the Sophist is here viewed as acquiring know- 
ledge, but, as one engaged in preventing others from making 
good a position by argument, he is said to be concerned with 
acquisition (cf. p. 219 c: 'E^eiS?/ brjixtovpyet //,ez> ovbev tovtcov, to. 
bi ovra nal yeyovora to. fx^v ytipovrai Ao'yots Kal TTpdigeat. ra 8e 
toIs x€ipovjj.ivoi.s ovk e77trp€7iet). He contends, then, not with 
bodily but mental force ; not with long arguments, as in court, 
but through brief questions and replies : not on the infinity of 
details about which men wrangle, but on the general nature of 
the Just and Unjust, and of all other things : not, like some 
wearisome talkers, to the injury of his property, but (to note 
this point once more) to the increase of his gains. The So- 
phist's procedure is here characterized as essentially abstract 
and negative : being distinguished by the former quality from 
ordinary converse, and by the latter from positive science and 
philosophy. (225 a — 226 a.) It is not immediately apparent, 
however, how, under this description, the work of the Sophist is 
to be distinguished from the work of Socrates, except by the 
outward symptom that the one becomes rich by his trade and 
the other poor. And accordingly the two are brought into close 
companionship in the remarkable passage which follows. (226 b- 
23 1 a) . Controversy is, or should be, an art of separating the 
false from the true, of determining what propositions are not 
tenable. And this amounts to a most valuable purification of 
the mind. For of separation there are two kinds, the sepa- 
ration of like from like and the purgation of the good from 
the evil : and of mental evils there are two kinds, that civil 
war of reason and passion w r hich is the disease of the soul, and 
ignorance, or spiritual ugliness, which is either conscious or 
unconscious. Unconscious ignorance is the last stage of mental 
deformity. And it is from this that men are freed when they 
are asked questions about something which they think they 
know, and are thus purged from the obstructions of conceit, 
without which purgation no learning will do them any good. 
This process is no other than the Elenchus. Shall Ave attri- 
bute this to the Sophist ? Plato stands in doubt. 
I12 



In LNTRODUCTION 

We are thus led from observing a feature of the Sophist 

which any one might verity, to a theory of his end or function 
which is only temporarily admitted, and from which some- 
thing is at once detracted. For the value of his office, as a 
purifier of the mind, clearly depends in some measure on the 
reality of the arguments by which he convinces men of error. 
And these are presently shewn to be unreal. Yet Plato had 
a meaning in assigning to him this function even provisionally : 
and we have here perhaps the most striking appreciation of a 
contemporary phase of thought which is to be found in ancient 
philosophy. For it is the simple truth that Protagoras and 
Gorgias did imperfectly and unconsciously a part of the same 
work Avhich Socrates did thoroughly and consciously : that 
their reasonings were to be valued chiefly for their negative 
results : that in breaking up the ground of old beliefs they 
did indispensable service as the pioneers of philosophy : and 
that this clearing of the way, by the application of a shrewd 
and fearless intellect to all matters sacred and profane, fami- 
liar and unfamiliar, and that chiefly in the way of question 
and denial, was a necessary step of progress, as it was cer- 
tainly the most widely-spread intellectual phenomenon of the 
generation which immediately preceded Socrates. The differ- 
ence between him and them, which is left unnoticed here 
though implied in what follows, — partly because the historical 
Socrates no longer exactly squared with Plato's ideal, — is that 
the Sophist disputes as if he knew; Socrates asks questions 
as one desiring to know : the Sophist is contented with de- 
molishing an opponent's theory, he is not conscious of any 
further aim ; with Socrates each negative result is valued at 
once as a liberation of the mind from error, and as a forward 
step towards the positive apprehension of truth. This union 
or balance of the positive with the negative "arm," it is 
Plato's aim in this dialogue to vindicate and preserve. Thus 
the History of Philosophy, although not endorsing the assump- 
tion with which Plato sets out, that the common name Sophist 
must be significant of a common nature, confirms his estimate 
of the general tendency and common function of those to 
whom he assigns the name. 

Up to this point all is tentative and uncertain : and the 
definitions hitherto obtained are phenomenal merely. This is 



TO THE SOPHIST. liii 

manifest from their number and variety. For of an object 
which is fully comprehended there is one adequate definition 
and only one. In order to come nearer to understanding the 
Sophist's nature, we take up again the definition which appeared 
most suggestive, that which described his procedure as contro- 
versial. This art of controversy or disputation embraces all 
topics in heaven and earth. And those who admire the 
Sophist believe him to know all the things about which he 
disputes. This pretension refutes itself, for omniscience is not 
given to man. The essence of the Sophist is that he pretends 
to a knowledge which is unreal. Thus the disguises of our 
Proteus are stripped off, and we see him in his true colours, 
neither as a huntsman, nor as a merchant, nor as an intellectual 
wrestler, nor as a physician of the soul, but as the master of an 
art of illusion : a juggler, who imposes with the appearance of 
knowledge on inexperienced minds : just as the painter can pass 
off his shows for realities on the more thoughtless amongst 
young children. Hence he belongs to the multifarious class of 
imitators, or likeness-makers, and, not to dwell at present on 
the cardinal difficulty which this new notion involves, he is 
brought once more under a different summum genus. Hitherto, 
his race has been derived, by different lines, from the art of 
"getting/'' his origin must now be referred to the art of 
"making/"' all art having been at first divided into these two 
branches. " Creation" is Divine and Human, and each of these 
again is divided according as the thing made is real or only a 
likeness of what is real. A dream, for instance, is a divinely- 
made likeness or illusion. A picture may be called a humanly- 
made dream. Of human likeness-making there are two kinds : 
one where the likeness is real, the other where the likeness is 
only apparent and relative to the individual who sees the like- 
ness. The Sophist's arguments belong to this more shadowy or 
" phantastic" kind. And here he works not with instruments, 
but with his own person ; not with knowledge of the things he 
imitates, namely, justice and virtue, but only having opinion 
respecting them : not innocently thinking that he knows them, 
but hiding a guilty consciousness of charlatanry. By pausing 
here we should include the public speaker, who is the counter- 
feit of the statesman as the Sophist is of -the philosopher. 
He, however, imposes on the public in lengthened addresses, 



liv INTRODUCTION 

whereas the Sophist's business, as we have already said, is, by 
brief arguments, to compel individuals to contradict themselves. 
(281 c — 236 a, 265 a — 268.) The name is thus restricted to 
the dialectical as distinguished from the rhetorical aspect of the 
false use of the intellect. This is a distinction which Plato had 
not always observed : and in treating individual Sophists it 
was not easy to do so, for the two characters were often com- 
bined in the same person. Protagoras, for instance, as we learn 
from Plato's dialogue of that name, professed himself to be 
equally a master of copiousness and brevity. And Socrates ob- 
serves in the Gorgias that Sophists and rhetoricians are mixed 
up together, and know not Avhat to make of one another, nor 
do other men know what to make of them d . But Plato is here 
describing the ideal Sophist : and the function of fallacious 
scientific argument is ideally distinguishable from that of 
speaking so as to influence the feelings. The word is, how- 
ever, allowed to regain the more extended application in Polit. 
291b, 303 c. 

2o0t(TriK?/ is here characterized as a method, and is to philo- 
sophy what avTiXoyiK-r] is to 8ia\eKTi/c7j, what disputation is to 
scientific inquiry. It is possible that while restricting the 
application of the term on one side, Plato here extends it on 
another beyond the limits of his own habitual use. so as to 
include some of his own brethren of the Socratic family. He 
perhaps indicates that the Eristic tendency, which was growing 
strong by this time amongst the pupils of Euclides of Megara, 
w r as defective in some of the elements of a true philosophy. 
The reason for thinking that he means this is not merely the 
emphatic mention of the art of controversy, which Plato is fond 
of distinguishing from real inquiry 6 , but the direction of the 
whole dialogue against the extreme of Eleatic doctrine, on 
which we know that the Megarian logic w^as based. This 
hypothesis also accounts for the Sophist being identified with 
a picture of the cross-examining spirit, which, as Mr. Grote 

a He tells Callicles afterwards (p. Rep. 5, 454 a — c; Phaed. 90 b, 101 e; 

520 a) that the Sophist is superior to Theset. 164 c; Men. 80 e. In this enu- 

the Rhetor, as the lawgiver is to the meration the description of the young 

judge: i.e. the Sophist furnishes the dialecticians in Phileb. 15 d e, should 

Rhetor with ideas and arguments. not be omitted : with which compare 

e The chief passages in which Plato also Rep. 7, 539 b. 
censures a.vri\oyiK7\ are the following: 



TO THE SOPHIST. Iv 

observes, not only resembles Socrates, but resembles no one 

else. For the Megarians followed Socrates in refuting 
opinions : but departed from him by separating the negative 
process from the inductive aim, and, in directing their method 
to the resolution of phenomena, and the establishment by this 
means of an abstract being, or goodness, or thought, returned 
partially to the dogmatism of Zeno. 

There are a few detached points which it will bo well to 
notice before we turn from this frame-work of satirical defini- 
tion to the larger and more dialectical portion of the dialogue. 

1 . Though the Sophist is of course an artist and a man of 
science (for the definition proceeds through a classification 
of the sciences), yet the science of learning and knowing (to 
IAadinxa.TiK.bv — elbos 6\ov tG>v tz\vG>v koX to tt\s yv(ap[a€u>s) is the 
only heading of those introduced at first, viz.; 

(rtoirjTLKr) — k 7-7777/07 

r— ; -i -^ t n 

[xadrnxaTLKi] Kal )^pr]p.aT- aycov- 6r]pevT- 

yvcopiaTiKrj laTiKij kttlkti <- k v)') 

under which no attempt is made to bring him. This touch 
of satire can hardly be unintentional. 

2. The variety of definitions to which we are led by the 
process of dichotomies when applied to the Sophist, not only 
shews that his nature is difficult to grasp, but also proves the 
method to be one-sided and inadequate. The angler, an artist, 
by the way, who is known to Homer (Od. 4, 369), has easily 
a place assigned him, because the conception of his art, when 
analysed, is not found to contain elements which are imper- 
fectly known. But the activity of the Sophist is complex and 
various ; and when the principle, on which his other traits 
depend, is at last found, this leads the way to difficulties, 
which the process of mere logical distinction is powerless to 
resolve. And this for two reasons : because the difficulty lies 
in that notion of absolute difference on which the method itself 
rests; and because for the solution of the difficulty there is 
required the complementary notion of combination, commu- 
nion, correlation : which division cannot dispense with indeed 
(since the members of each division are unities and general 
forms), but throws into the background. AtaKptriK?) needs to 
be supplemented by avyi<piTu<ij : the StaXeicriKos only knows 



lvi [NTRODUCTION 

when and how. Hence it is farther necessary to examine how 
the two great categories <>f sameness and difference, on which 
this double process depends, arc related to each other in their 
most abstract form f . 

3. The idea of purification, connected here with the Elen- 
chus, or negative dialectic, and in the Politicus with the banish- 
ment of offending members from the state (this being a political 
as the former was a mental purgation), though in both places 
illustrated from the art of medicine, probably originated in 
the mysteries and was derived by Plato from a Pythagorean 
source. Compare the KaOapixoC of Empedocles, and see pp. 
80-82 of the Phasdo. It may be noticed that, in the Phaedo, 
the notion of impurity is associated with all that is sensible 
and bodily, as contrasted with the ideal : in these dialogues 
the evils deprecated are falsehood in the mind and wickedness 
in the state, which are only mythically identified with the 
corporeal element, and purification is the separation of the evil 
from the good. 

4. The comprehension under one heading of the processes 
of dialectic, pharmacy, ablution, scouring, sweeping, and even 
clothes-brushing, gives rise to the remark that scientific method 
ignores all those distinctions of worth, respectability, triviality, 
and baseness, which rest on feeling and habit, and looks only 
on those resemblances and differences which are acknowledged 
by Reason. This may be compared with the saying of Parme- 
nides to the youthful Socrates, that when philosophy has taken 
hold of him as it will one day take hold, he will no longer have 
regard to the opinions of men, but will view all things, however 
vulgar or base, in the light of Universal Forms. On this point 
enough has perhaps been said in the notes. But there is some- 
thing extremely characteristic of the spirit of these dialogues, 
in the mixture of scientific calmness and ironical satisfaction 
with which the high things of this world are thus brought to 
the level of the meanest s. 

f See the passage of the Politicus is only partially applicable. 
(285 d) where the argument from ex- S Compare the treatment of rhetoric 

ample is vindicated on the ground that in the Gorgias as coordinate with cook- 

the highest subjects have no analogies ing, and in the Euthydemus as a de- 

which are immediately palpable, to partment of magic (rrjs twv incpSiov 

sense. It is to such as these that T6X"??s). 
classification as a method of definition, 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ivii 

5. The form of evil from which deliverance is effected by 
refutation deserves a passing notice, although the thought is 
one of the most familiar to readers of Plato : the greatest igno- 
rance, i. e. ignorance which the mind mistakes for knowledge. 
So the false statesmen are said to have the greatest ignorance 
of the greatest of all subjects, in that they are ignorant of 
statecraft, when they think they are most certainly informed 
of this h . And in the analysis of the ridiculous, in the Philebus, 
the same bad eminence is given to the conceit of knowledge 1 . 
(See also Legg. 9, 863 c.) Yet in the conclusion of this 
dialogue it would seem as though unconscious ignorance were 
the less culpable ; for the Sophist is denned as having a guilty 
suspicion that all is not right within. The inconsistency of 
these two views does not seem to be noticed by Plato, who 
would probably, however, have said, if he had been taxed with 
it, ' that he meant by conscious ignorance, the ignorance of one 
desirous to know/ 

Still, the notion of a state of ignorance acquiesced in, not- 
withstanding a suspicion that it exists, is hardly reconcileable 
with the Socratic principle, which is here made the ground 
of the Socratic cross-examination, that no soul is willingly 
ignorant of anything. 

The more practical view, which is'turned to the disadvantage 
of the Sophist as an " ironical mimic," belongs to the later 
phase of Platonism. See the passage in the ninth book of the 
Laws, already quoted, where an attempt is made to reconcile 
the theory that injustice is never voluntary, with legislation 
for the exemption from punishment of involuntary crime k . 

6. Plato's later manner may also be detected in the grave 
digression, suggested by the logical distinction of the Art of 
Making into Divine and human, in Avhich it is solemnly 
asserted that the world was made by God in accordance with 
Reason, and not by the spontaneous working of Nature or 
Chance. The tone of this passage closely resembles that of 
the tenth book of the Laws : where the persuasive demon- 
stration, the koyos juera ttciOovs avaynaias here spoken of, is 
applied to an imaginary case. The strong reprobation in 
which the opposite view is held, and the moral and religious 
fervour with which the answer of Theastetus is received, are 

h Polit. 302 a. ! Plrileb. 48 e. 1: Laws, 861-S64. 

i 



lviii INTRODUCTION 

in keeping with the impressive solemnity and earnestness of 
Plato's latest writings. (Sec especially Legg. 10, 889.) 

II. In defining the Sophist as an illusory controversialist, 
we seem to have caught him in our net; hut we only seem to 
have caught him : for hy his controversial art he will prove 
that our net is non-existent, and as we are allowed no weapons 
hut arguments, to he refuted is to fail. However shameless 
it may appear for a controversialist, who is daily detecting 
falsehood, to say that falsehood is impossible, he will use this 
argument in self-defence, and we must meet his logic with a 
higher logic or give up the battle. Our object will not merely 
be to refute him, for that would be after all only a controver- 
sial victory like his, but to throw fresh light upon the whole 
question which his art confuses, — that of the nature and cor- 
relation of the affirmative and negative elements in thought, 
or, according to the more objective mode of conception which 
Plato still preserves, of Being and Not- Being. 

Thus we are led at once to the most abstract form of the 
inquiry, the nature of the negative idea ; even the relation of 
this idea to a subject being through the greater part of the 
discussion left out of view. The Sophist is accused of making 
a false impression. But to speak of false impressions is to assert 
an existence which is in the same breath denied — to predicate 
reality of the unreal. Is this possible ? That depends on the 
meaning of the word not, and of the word existence, and their 
relation to each other. This question has a double bearing on 
the Sophist, of whose definition we are in search. If it is 
proved that this combination of existence and non-existence is 
possible, he exists, but his foundation is insecure, for his con- 
troversial art is based on the absolute mutual exclusion of these 
alternatives. If on the other hand his art is sound, he escapes 
refutation, but only by proving his own non-existence. There 
is hardly to be mistaken in the dialogue this twofold refer- 
ence, which is not a little perplexing to the modern reader, 
a reference on the one hand to the problem of the existence 
of phenomena, one of the deepest of all to Plato, and, on the 
other, to the oppositions of false science, that " last decom- 
position of the reason, which consisted in separating everything 
from all things 1 ." Yet both this error and that difficulty 
1 Soph. 259 e. 



TO THE SOPHIST. lix 

arc included in the sweeping generalization of the fxrj 6v, and 
both are met by the new formula of the Relativity of Negative 
Expressions. This has also a bearing, as Plato did not fail 
to discover, on the method of logical divisions. Duaresis 
cannot be safely used apart from Synagoge. Classes mutually 
exclusive are still to be viewed in their relations to each other. 
The mind must not be dazzled by difference, so as to overlook 
resemblance, nor by resemblance, so as to neglect true differ- 
ences. By a resuscitation of the Heraclitean principle in the 
world of mind, it is again found that the objects of thought are 
held asunder and together at once (pLacjjepojxevov ael avixcpe- 
perat). And thus the notion of Being is not less modified than 
the notions of Appearance and the Negation of Being. For 
Being can be no longer held as a mere Absolute, but stands 
related to Not-Being, which it differs from, and yet includes. 
Here also it appears to the modern reader as if conceptions, 
which are to him radically distinct, are blended, not to say 
confused. For Being seems to be conceived at once logically, 
as the positive in thought and speech, and metaphysically, as 
an " hypostatized" idea. 

But in order to enter into Plato's meaning, it is necessary to 
study his position in this dialogue, as he has in some measure 
enabled us to do, historically. 

The fallacies which we find satirized in the Euthydemus are 
chiefly of two kinds ; in one of which all resemblance or analogy 
is supposed to imply identity and to exclude the notion of 
difference, while in the other all difference is conceived as 
absolute difference, exclusive of all resemblance and relation : 
' If I know one thing, I know all things, for I cannot know 
and not know ; ' ' If Zeus is my God, he is mine to do what I 
please with him ; ' ' That which is different from the idea of 
beauty cannot be beautiful,'' and so on. And thus all propo- 
sitions except identical propositions are declared impossible, a 
theory which Aristotle imputes to the followers of Antisthenes. 
Another paradox, which is likewise attributed to the Cynic, 
appears in the same dialogue, — the impossibility of negative 
argument {\xr] zlvai avTikeyziv). The above is a humorous 
picture of the same notions with which Plato deals seriously in 
the present dialogue. That the same cannot be different, nor 
the different the same; that predication is impossible, that is, 
i 2 



Ix INTRODUCTION 

there can be no relation between different ideas; above all, 
that falsehood cannot bo disproved, for that to deny existence, 
while naming existence, involves a contradiction in terms, — 
these are in substance the very theories which Plato here 
undertakes to modify. Now in accounting for these aberra- 
tions of thought, to say that the Organon did not yet exist, is 
to state what, though true and important to remember, docs 
not afford a sufficient explanation — aArjOcs \iiv, ovQlv be aa^h. 
It is true that in the shape in which they then appeared, 
they could have no strength now. But their strength then 
lay in a mode of thought, which prevailed very extensively 
in that age, and which had exercised a more powerful 
influence over Plato himself than any other except that of 
Socrates ; a mode of thought derived in great part uncon- 
sciously from the philosophy of Parmcnides and the dialectic 
of Zeno : the same which appears in such assumptions (familiar 
to the student of the Thesetetus) as that Socrates ill is a 
different man from Socrates well (Theset. 159 b), and that 
everything must be either known or not known by the mind 
(lb. 188 a). This may be described as the tendency to view 
every subject in the light of abstract alternatives : to apply 
the language of logic immediately to the sensible world : to 
reject as matter of fact that which cannot at once be formu- 
lated as an idea. This " disease," as we can imagine him to 
have called it, Plato here traces to its origin in the teaching 
of Parmenides, and thus redeems the promise made by 
Socrates in the Theaetetus, there not fulfilled, to examine the 
deep wisdom of this man : the greatest of those who uphold 
the indissoluble unity of Being. (Theaet. 183 e.) In doing so, 
he not only confutes others who had pushed the tendency in 
question to an extreme, (he rather uses them as a beacon to 
indicate where the truth does not lie,) but, what is of more 
importance, develops further, or at least defines more clearly, 
his own central point of view. For he also had yielded to the 
charm of " the Eleatic Palamedes" and had held Parmenides 
" in reverence and awe:" nor had the dominance of this idea 
been merely logical, but had amounted to a speculative convic- 
tion, may we not even say, a theological belief? 

We cannot tell whether this impression had at all been 
derived from Socrates, whom he has represented as meeting 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ixi 

with the philosopher in early youth. Socrates may have 
spoken of Parmenides, as he did of Heraclitus, though his 
own work in philosophy was independent of all influence from 
without. At all events it is quite possible that even during 
the time of his converse with Socrates, Plato may have been 
attracted towards the Eleatic School. His master's influence 
was unobtrusive, not hindering the accretion of ideas from all 
sides, and only after his death would be found to "comprehend 
all other." It was probably at a still earlier time that Plato's 
interest and curiosity was excited by the fine discourses and 
immense popularity of Protagoras and Gorgias ; and it is 
certain, on the authority of Aristotle, that his first deep draught 
of philosophy had been received from Cratylus, who taught 
him the Heraclitean doctrine that " all was motion." This 
theory, as then held by the enthusiasts of Ephesus, whom 
Plato has satirized, was the secondary and less noble phase of 
a great thought — that all which abides eternally is a universal 
ever-active Law of Becoming. Heraclitus was no materialist. 
" Matter" had no existence for him, and he denied the separate 
existence of all " Form" except the Highest Law, whose Per- 
manence is Perpetual Energy. In the hands of his followers, 
however, the assertion of this universal law seems to have 
degenerated into a mere doctrine of the relativity of particular 
being. And here the Eastern theorists were met by Zeno, 
who in support of the Eleatic faith in One Sole Being, proved 
that all relative existence was self-contradictory and inconceiv- 
able by Reason. Time and Motion, into which the sensible 
universe had already been resolved, were themselves annihi- 
lated. The movement of the intellect, by which this defensive 
negative process was effected, was the first conscious dialectic, 
the germ of much in Plato and of more in Aristotle, and, in 
conjunction with the Socratic Elenchus, the direct parent of 
the method which in this dialogue, and somewhat differently 
in the Parmenides, is turned against the hypothesis of the 
simple absoluteness of Being™. But however important logi- 
cally, the philosophy of Zeno, like that of Cratylus, while more 
definite, was also narrower than that of his master. He had 

m The Zenonian method is " parri- iartv el Kal evriv, aKard\7]Trrov av- 
cidally" turned against the Eleatic Opdi-Ktf ei Kal KaraX^wrdv, avsp^uiVTov 
doctrine in the thesis of Gorgias : ovdev Kal aSie^riy^Tou reus WAas. 



Ixii INTRODUCTION 

descen led from metaphysics to logic, and in endeavouring 
to linkl the Absolute against all comers had assumed an atti- 
tude which was purely negative, and had adopted a method 
which, though of great significance, was merely abstract, and 
not directly applicable to the solution of any real problem. 

Plato, however, had " risen to the height of the great argu- 
ment/'' and had felt, not only the dialectical might of Zeno, 
but the transcendental sublimity of Parmenides. It is possible 
that he may have derived some of his own most famous 
imagery from the opening lines of the poem on the Nature of 
Things, where the philosophic impulse is represented as a car 
drawn by swift steeds, and the philosopher as the comrade 
of immortal charioteers. Be that as it may, a modern reader 
can hardly imagine the effect which the impressive lines of 
Parmenides must have produced on the mind of Plato, when 
already convinced by Cratylus of the utter changeableness of 
" all that seems/'' Something analagous may have been ex- 
perienced by individual students of Spinoza, Kant, or Hegel ; 
but philosophical belief in modern times presents for the most 
part but a faint image of the heaven of contemplation into 
which Plato must have been carried away on hearing reiterated 
with the eloquence of energetic faith, and proved as a neces- 
sary truth of Reason, the absolute Existence of One Being, 
inseparable from thought, equable, unchangeable, without 
beginning and without end, with no past or future, but an 
everlasting Now ; however apparently discrete, yet really con- 
tinuous or omnipresent, so that differences of space are done 
away as completely as differences of time ; whence phenomenal 
distinctions of all kinds, relation, change, beginning, ending, 
time, space, motion, are thrust out of sight or are seen to 
vanish away. 

This intellectual movement, by which we suppose Plato to 
have been affected, was confirmed, but also gradually modified, 
by his contemplation of the work of Socrates. In reflecting 
on the manner and substance of that wonderful endless talk, 
and on the ruling motive of that unswerving life, he saw the 
elements of all previous speculation brought into antagonism 
and yet into immediate relation with the common thoughts and 
common life of men, — to whose mental and political state the 
issue of that antagonism had given a deep and bitter interest. 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ixiii 

Before the cross-questioning of Socrates, which brought men 
to know the vanity of their own knowledge, the most fixed 
opinions were seen first to waver, and then to disappear. This 
Plato associated with the changeableness of phenomena ac- 
cording to Heraclitus; which viewed subjectively becomes the 
relativeness of sense, according to the doctrines of Protagoras 
and Aristippus : a relativeness which at the touch of negative 
dialectic, such as that of Zeno, is reduced to nothingness. 

But the result of the method of Socrates was not merely 
negative. His aim was to define, that is, to lay bare the one 
conception which belongs universally and unalterably to each 
subject of inquiry. Tn such a conception, if it were found, his 
mind would gladly rest. This is well expressed by Aristotle, 
who says that Socrates was the first who checked the aimless 
career of thought, and fixed the mind on Definition : irpdorov 
Trepl opcaixovs emoT^a-avTos tjjv hiavoiav. Now there is here 
implied a new and independent assertion of the Absolute ; for 
the endeavour of Socrates had no meaning, if the " Know- 
ledge" which he sought were less than the knowledge of that 
which is always and everywhere true ; if the ignorance of which 
he accused himself and convinced others, were ignorance only 
of the relative, the transient, or the phenomenal. But this 
Absolute of Socrates differs from that of Parmenides in two 
important respects. 

i. The Substance or Reality of which he speaks is not 
asserted as if known, but sought for as still unknown. The 
Existence of Being, which Parmenides asserted with so much 
vehemence, is taken for granted, and the mind is called away 
from the absorbing contemplation of this truth to the consi- 
deration of a new problem, which may be thus stated gene- 
rally : " What is Being ? or What is the form of Being ?" The 
change of mental attitude expressed in these few words, — from 
asserting "Being is" to asking "What is Being?" is of the 
highest importance ; for without the consciousness which is 
here evolved, that knowledge is a synthesis of a less general 
with a more general notion, the growth of science would have 
been arrested. Philosophers would have been contented with 
either assigning universality to some particular thing, or, like 
the Eleatics, excluding the particular from cognition. 

2. Further, he did not ask the question in this merely 



Ixh INTRODUCTION 

abstract form: he implied an absolute standard of truth and 
good; but, as the word "good" reminds us. his inquiries had 
an immediate bearing on the life of men. Hence, instead of 
attempting at once to solve the problem, " What is Being V 
lie sought to determine " What is righteous, what is un- 
righteous, what is a state, what is the true statesman, what 
is government, what is it to be fit to govern?" The solution 
of these problems was approached by what Bacon would have 
called a process of exclusions, through a series of hypotheses, 
which were successively modified or relinquished when in some 
case not found to apply to the subject of definition. And while 
things commonly confused were thus distinguished, things 
commonly distinguished (e. g. folly and madness) were not less 
unexpectedly combined. 

3. The personal attributes of Socrates enhanced this union of 
the universal with the particular, and of the abstract with the 
concrete, in his method of talk. The eye that was fixed on 
the unchangeableness of truth and right, was the same which 
pierced through and through the follies of his contemporaries ; 
the lofty soul had a cynical exterior, the widest generalizations 
were hidden beneath the meanest instances, the imperturbable, 
urbane, ironical demeanour, helped to bring the dry light of 
reason into continual, immediate contact with the infinite 
anomalies of opinion and action; the strange being, unlike 
all other men, had a direct, unmistakeable influence on almost 
all. By contrast with him the hollowness of all pretence, espe- 
cially in other teachers, was clearly seen, while his example 
gave the appearance of meanness to those who taught for pay. 
Yet he was the first to admit their individual excellences and 
accomplishments ; while in conversation with him their real 
characteristics, their strength as well as their weakness, were 
most truly manifested. 

Thus with Socrates began a philosophic movement which 
in some elements was kindred to the Eleatic, but radically 
different in others ; — kindred, because vindicating by the refu- 
tation of falsehood an ideal truth; different, because inductive 
in method, and practical as well as speculative in ultimate aim 
— identifying truth with good. 

But in continuing and interpreting this movement, Plato at 
first dwelt consciously rather on the former than the latter 






TO THE SO I'll 1ST. Kv 

aspect of Socratic thought; rather on the absolute contrasl 
between the actual state of human opinion and the ideal of 
Knowledge, than on the nature of Knowledge as implying a 
relation of the mind to " Being," or of the Universal to the 
Particular. This, as may be gathered indirectly from this dia- 
logue, was partly due to the prevalence of the Elcatic impulse 
■ — the conviction, namely, of the incommunicable perfection of 
abstract Being, the sole object of Knowledge or true thought: 
but partly also to the general law by which belief always 
precedes criticism. The problem of the post-Socratic philo- 
sophy for those who did not hold with Antisthenes that Defi- 
nition was merely nominal, was, granting the possibility of 
Knowledge and the existence of general forms, i. What is 
Knowledge 1 2. What are the dbrj ? And, from the objective 
character of the Greek philosophy, the first of these two ques- 
tions was chiefly, although not wholly, studied in the light of 
the second. In other words, the effort of Socrates was to find 
the etSos of man, justice, temperance, &c; that of his followers 
was to find the nature of the etSo? generally. But, just as the 
Existence of Being was asserted, before any one thought of 
asking, What is Being ? so, in entering on this new stage of 
thought, Plato believes in Knowledge and the Ideas before he 
examines them, and his dialectic is for a time coloured with a 
haze of imagination. He is at first contented with declaring 
that Knowledge is the only real ground of virtue, and that 
accordingly all virtue is essentially one. Presently a question 
rises about the Origin of Knowledge — How can Knowledge 
have a beginning ? For how can a man inquire into what he 
does not know ? How are we to conceive the transition from 
ignorance to certainty ? This question is answered, as Plato 
elsewhere answers questions which are not ripe for solution, 
mythically. We learn by recollection, as appears from the 
lessons of geometry where the teacher leads the pupil to draw 
forth from his own mind what the moment previously he did 
not know. Thus the "Eristic" objection is removed, that a 
man cannot inquire about either what he knows or what he 
does not know: and the anticipation of poetry and prophecy, 
that we are immortal beings, is confirmed. To learn is to 
awaken slumbering knowledge. " The Soul has been every- 
where and has seen all things, and therefore must have known 
k 



Ixvi INTRODUCTION 

ail things before coming hither: and if she can recover one 
thing only, there is hope that she may by courageous efforts 
regain the rest." (Men. 81 c.) By this hypothesis the true 
objects of knowledge arc relegated to another world than this 
and to a previous life. The objects of sense remind us of them 
through a process of association. (Phaedo.) These Eternal 
Forms the Soul beheld in her first flight, ere she lost her 
wings, when the impulse of the higher love carried her amongst 
immortal chariots, beyond the visible sphere, into the plain 
of truth, where Beauty, Justice, Temperance, Wisdom, dwell 
eternally, not as they are imagined but as they are known. 
(Phaadr.) 

This is the poetical mode of conceiving of the ideas, in 
which Plato embodied the feelings of wonder and delight with 
which he contemplated the first real inquiry which the world 
had seen. The object and end of that inquiry appeared to 
him surrounded with a mystic halo, — like his own image of 
Beauty, lightening from a transcendent height, — annihilating 
and making worthless the shadows which surround us here. 

But Plato was far from resting in this as a final theory 
of Knowledge. His belief in immortality and pre-existence 
remained, it is true ; but did not supersede other inquiries con- 
cerning the ideas, which were wholly independent of such a 
theory, and proceeded simply by experience and reflection. 
Thus in the Republic, the vision of the ideas in their purity, 
without help from sense, is the goal towards which the mind is 
allowed to climb up the ladder of hypotheses, and although we 
hear of an intellectual region, the context shews this language 
to be metaphorical, rather than mythological as in the Phsedrus 
and Phsedon. The line is still drawn sharply and broadly be- 
tween Being as the object of knowledge and Not-Being as the 
object of ignorance ; but, first, an intermediate state, having for 
object the changeable, which is and is not, is crudely imagined, 
and, at a later period of the discussion (bk. vii.), the succes- 
sive steps by which the mind rises from the lowest ignorance 
to the highest knowledge are supplied. No mention is made 
of recollection, unless we count as such the mythical account of 
Lethe in bk. x. ; and immediately after the allegory of the cave, 
in which the sensible has been represented as the copy of the 
ideal world, we have a piece of psychological analysis, in which 



TO THE SOPHIST. lxvii 

tho idea is spoken of as the universal element evolved by 
Reason from the impressions of Sense. " Intelligence is called 
in to determine between the contrarieties of sense. I see two 
fingers, one large the other small. Sight gives me opposite im- 
pressions respecting objects which are alike. But sight cannot 
answer the questions which the mind cannot but ask hereupon. 
Is this puzzling impression one, or two ? If two, then each is 
one, and so on. Thus intelligence distinguishes between great 
and small, which in the sensation of vision were confused. 
And then only are we induced to ask the question which 
reason suggests,, ' What is the nature of greatness and small- 
ness?' The ideas thus distinguished are objects of Reason, 
the former confused impression was received through sight." 
(vii. 534.) 

Such a relation between intelligence and sensation is ac- 
knowledged even in the Phsedrus, in the midst of the mythical 
description of the Plain of Truth : Aei yap avOpuirov avviivai 
k<xt ethos Xeyo'pevov, e/c ttoW&v lov alaOijcreodv ets €V Aoyic-ju<3 
gwaipovixevov : though it is immediately added, " Now this is 
recollection of what the mind has seen in a previous state." 

In both these passages the mind is seen to approach the dbrj 
through reflection on the experience of sense. The same notion 
is still more clearly expressed in the Theaetetus (184, 5) : " We 
speak commonly of seeing with the eye, hearing with the ear, 
and so forth : but in truth it is with the mind that we see and 
hear, and feel and taste, and smell. The mind receives these 
particular impressions through the organs of the different senses. 
(Cf. Phileb. 33 c.) But there are some things which the mind 
perceives without any such corporeal aid. These are not par- 
ticular but universal. For instance, the mind receives through 
touch an impression of softness from a soft thing, of hardness 
from a hard thing. But when the mind says this is hard, a 
new element arises, viz. the Being of the hardness, which is 
perceived, not through any of the senses, but by the mind 
alone, and the Idea of hardness is then first perceived. Fur- 
ther, that hardness and softness are opposed and that the 
opposition between them is real, these and the like thoughts 
the mind herself determines, when she reviews and compares 
the impressions which she has received through the senses." 
The idea, then, in this, which may be termed the psychological 
k 2 



Ixviii [NTR0D1 CTICXN 

aspect, is that unity which the mind seeks amidst the variety of 
sensible impressions, distinguishing what is confused in sense, 

and uniting scattered phenomena in one conception : the uni- 
versal clement; which is latent in the mind's first impression 
of each object, and. is disengaged by reflection to he contem- 
plated by reason. The right performance of this process is 
the secret of method : " to unite and divide in thought accord- 
ing to natural forms, that is, according to the reality of things, 
not mangling the victims like a bad sacrificer." (Phaedr. 265 e.) 
It is in connection with this logical or dialectical process that 
the word eI5os is most frequently used by Plato. 

The ideas are now seen as objects of intelligence, which 
remain unchanged, while the sensations through which the 
mind is awakened to perceive them are perpetually giving 
place to new and perhaps opposite impressions. (See Cratyl. 
440.) Each is separated from the phenomena through which 
it was at first recognized, in an isolation like that of the Eleatic 
Being, as the absolute in which the relative is done away : the 
avvTToOcTov, independent of external support ; the universal 
absorbing the particular. But here several difficulties arise. 

1. How is the absoluteness of Knowledge reconcileable with 
the possibility of error ? For if everything is either known or 
unknown, how can that which is unknown be in any way the 
object of belief? Hence the hypothesis in Rep. bk. v. of "that 
which is and is not" as the object of opinion, and the elaborate 
airopiai of the Thesetetus, where it is attempted to account for 
error by imagining thought as a process between sensation 
and memory, or between memory and memory. A nearly 
parallel difficulty is put in the Parmenides. If there is no 
relation between the perfect and the imperfect, man cannot 
know the ideas, nor can the divine mind be cognizant of human 
thoughts. 

2. How can the universal be absolute and yet embrace par- 
ticulars ? This or a cognate difficulty is raised in the Theae- 
tetus, where it is found impossible to distinguish the whole 
from the sum of the parts : the same airopia is explicitly stated 
in the Philebus, where it is asked, how can One exist in many 
and yet be One ? — and in the Parmenides, through the illus- 
tration of the sail, which covers many men, but covers each 
only by a part of itself. The notion of ij.46e£ts, which Socrates 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ixix 

introduces in the Parmenides, only creates new difficulties, but 
something approaching a rational solution appears in the 
Philebus, where Number is seen to mediate between Unity 
and Infinity. 

3. Granting the existence of abstract ideas of resemblance, 
difference, justice, beauty, good ; shall we say that the idea of 
man, or fire, or water, or, still more, of mud, dirt, hair, exist 
absolutely 11 ? (Parm.) 

4. Must not ideas be related to one another? For is not 
dialectic, and even language, a movement or process between 
ideas? Nay, if the idea is the cause of phenomena, must 
there not be a principle of life or movement inherent in each 
idea ? In the Eepublic, for example, the operations of science 
are conceived as a movement along the chain of true ideas, a 
way upwards and downwards which is the same. And at the 
head of this nexus of dhr] is the form of Good, which in some 
way unexplained is the cause of Being and of Knowledge. In 
the Philebus also there is imagined a process between the limit 
and the unlimited, the one and the many, and a cause of this 
process is supposed. And in the Timaeus the Creator prepares 
for his work by welding together opposite ideas. Thus the 
Sophist and Parmenides are not the sole response in Plato to 
the challenge of Socrates, " I should admire any man who 
could shew that Resemblance, Difference, Plurality, Unity, 
Motion, Rest, admitted of composition and division {h kavroh 
Tavra bwafxeva (rvyKtpavvvcrQai kcli biaKptveadai . . . tt\v avTr\v 
TavTrjv airopiav ev avrols T06S eiSecri TTavTobcnr&s TrXeKoixivqv . . . 
emSeTcfou. Parm. 129 e). 

5. If the idea, as Socrates urges when pressed by Par- 
menides (lb. 132 b), is a conception of the mind, yet that con- 
ception must have an object, and Knowledge is in some way a 
process between subject and object , in which, if the mind is 
active, the object of Knowledge must be conceived as passive. 
In this way also the Eternal Form is brought back from the 

n When Plato makes Parmenides eKacrrov rrjs (pvcreais aipacrdcu w wpocrriKei 

remark on this, "Philosophy has not tyvxys icpdirrreadaL rov toiovtoV irpo<r- 

yet acquired her final hold on you," rjKei Ss £vyytve?' u> -nXriffidaas /ecu /j-iyels 

he is perhaps covertly satirizing the t<3 ovti ovtqos, yevprjeras vovv koX aArj- 

thoroughness of the Megarian logic. deiav, yvoit) re km. a\r)6cos {wtj «ai rpe- 

See Rep. 6, 490 b. Xlplv ab-rov $> sgtiv (poiro, /cot ovtoo A.17701 coSlvos, irplv 8' ov. 



Ixx INTRODUCTION 

fruitless isolation in which it has been placed by the first 
efforts of purely abstract thought ; and the reflection rises that 
Perfect Being must include the attributes of consciousness and 
life, and therefore, in a certain sense, of motion. (Soph. 248.) 

The difficulties which attend the hypothesis of the ideas are 
at least as clearly stated by Plato as by Aristotle : and his 
statements have also the advantage of being directed against 
the phase of the doctrine which he knew and to which he had 
been himself inclined, and not to the confused Pythagorean 
fancies of his followers. The question is most clearly enun- 
ciated in the Theaetetus from the side of Knowledge, and in 
the Parmenides from the side of Being. But those who re- 
member the various fertility of Plato's mind will not expect 
the objections raised in different dialogues to be precisely the 
same. He never sought to bind the play of thought in a 
single formula. When it had once occurred to him to criticize 
the theory of ideas, the problem was sure to be seen by him 
in changing lights, although the elements of the question 
remain essentially unaltered. Is each idea one or many, at 
rest or in motion, isolated or related to others, limiting or 
limited; is Being inanimate or endowed with life, exclusive 
of particulars, or how related to them ? Is it possible wholly 
to separate Knowledge from sense and opinion ? These, if not 
the same question, form a class of questions, of the reality of 
which Plato is conscious in some dialogues, but appears wholly 
unconscious in others (for instance in the Phsedo and Cratylus). 
The dialogues, besides the Sophist and Politicus, in which the 
effect of this movement within Platonism in the mind of its 
founder are most evident, are the Philebus, Timaaus, and Laws. 
In the Philebus, not only is the difficulty stated at the outset, 
in the form of the problem how to reconcile the antithesis 
between the one and many, but the combination and resolu- 
tion of ideas is elaborately exemplified, and a Cause of their 
combination in reality is conceived. The earlier part of the 
Timaeus contains a similar passage, and in both the author has 
laboured to imagine the mode in which the ideal and corporeal 
are conjoined. Both anticipate Aristotle in speaking of matter 
(omeipov, Ti6r\vrj), and of a cause by which form is impressed 
on matter. The Philebus has also a graduated scale of Know- 
ledges, in which the knowledge of the particular and concrete, 



TO THE SOPHIST. lxxi 

although regarded as " impure/' is deliberately allowed to 
have a place. And in the Laws, while the dhti are not heard 
of except as logical forms, and a higher movement (namely 
that of mind) is imagined as the cause both of rest and motion 
(10, 895), Plato is vehement in asserting that mind in all its 
manifestations is prior to the elements and controls them. 

The object of the preceding remarks has been to shew (1) 
That side by side with the poetical or metaphysical there grew 
up in Plato's mind a logical mode of conceiving the ideas ; 
(2) That as he viewed them in this two-fold aspect, and saw 
the latter of the two more clearly, he became conscious of the 
difficulties which the theory involved ; and (3) That he was 
led, partly through the consideration of these difficulties, to 
alter considerably his theory of Knowledge and Being : pass- 
ing from the bare assertion of an absolute object of Mind, to 
which he had been led by interpreting Socrates through 
Parmenides, towards the Aristotelian conception of logical 
categories and of Being as composed of Matter and Form by 
an efficient Cause. 

Turning now to the Sophist, from which we have been too 
long detained, we find the elaborate treatment of a difficulty, 
which is allowed to have been occasioned by the exclusiveness 
of the Eleatic point of view. This difficulty is not, as in the 
Philebus, how to find a meeting-point between unity and in- 
finity, but one more abstract still, how to explain the possibility 
of combining the positive and negative in thought. Philosophy 
by aspiring to the pure form of Being had become "dark 
from excess of light ; " had soared beyond the ken of mortals 
into an unseen heaven; and in "turning away her mind" from 
that which is not — from the unreal, and therefore from nega- 
tion—had deprived herself of the only weapon which could be 
of any avail to her against the spurious counterfeits of herself. 
She must deny as well as affirm, and she cannot deny without 
giving a certain place to Not-Being. It has been already said, 
that the Negative is here viewed in its ultimate abstraction. 
The distinctions of Aristotle, between xlrevbos, o-repjjerts, and 
hvva\xi$ or Kara (TviAfiefirjKos, which he employed in criticizing 
Plato, are certainly not thought of, but neither were they 
required, at least in the statement of the question. For false- 
hood is the object or correlative of denial, and both are equally 



Ixxii INTRODUCTION 

expressed whenever (he word "not 11 is uttered: and negation 
" per accidens" must obviously be explained through the 
theory of simple negation. The question is, does this word 
" not" imply such absolute severance between the terms which 
it divides, as to exclude the possibility of any relation between 
them .' If A is exclusive of B, is B therefore incapable of all 
communion or combination with At If so, a counterfeit of 
reality is inconceivable, for it is not reality, and yet partakes 
of reality in so far as it is really a counterfeit. This question 
is raised not with respect to individuals, or infimaB species, in 
which the coexistence of sameness and difference was an ad- 
mitted fact (Phil. 15 d), but with respect to general ideas, and 
the most universal of these, beginning with the most compre- 
hensive of all ideas, viz. that of Being. The " absolute sever- 
ance/'' which the injunction of Parmenides requires, between 
that which Is, and that which Is Not, was the origin and type 
of the spirit " which would separate each thing from every 
other" (Soph. 259 e); and the correction of this deeply-rooted 
tendency was necessary in order to make inquiry possible. 

After a statement of the perplexities in which the notion of 
Not-Being is involved according to the ordinary conception 
of it as the opposite of Being, shewing that it is inconceivable 
either as a predicate or as a subject, or as the object of refuta- 
tion and denial ; the Stranger expresses his intention, in this 
desperate case, of attacking the revered authority of Par- 
menides. This opens the whole question of the Nature of 
Being, and the theories of previous and contemporary philoso- 
phers on the subject. And in the course of the inquiry it is 
found that the notion of Being, according to prevailing views, 
is no less full of contradictions than that of Not-Being. 
Amongst the earlier thinkers, those who hold a fixed plurality 
of Beings must admit that existence is common to all these, 
and hence whatever number they assert must either be in- 
creased, or reduced to one. Those who, with Parmenides, 
believe in the Unity of Being, will find it hard to keep this 
unity inviolate while they use the terms Being, One, Whole, 
each with a distinct meaning, and while they admit, as they 
needs must, that a whole has parts. 

These difficulties are only briefly indicated : the chief criti- 
cism of Parmenides, or rather the modification of his view, 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxiii 

which has been promised above, is made indirectly, and only 
emerges when the contemporary phase of Greek philosophy 
has been examined in its two chief aspects. 

Here no attempt is made to determine the exact number of 
Beings. The battle rages about a different point. Is lieing 
corporeal or ideal? Some hold that nothing exists but bodies, 
which they can touch and handle : their opponents break up 
these bodies by dialectic into a flux of change, and assert the 
sole existence of certain bodiless ideas. 

Now the former, if pressed, and if they were capable of 
argument, would admit the existence of a soul, and of virtue 
and vice as attributes of the soul; and, though they might 
contend that the soul is corporeal, they could hardly maintain 
this of justice or wisdom. Hence they may be willing to sub- 
stitute for body as the characteristic of Being, the power of 
acting or of being acted upon. Being is possibility of energy. 

But the idealists will refuse this definition. Acting and 
suffering they say are properties not of Being, but of Becom- 
ing : for Being is exempt from change. Whereupon we ask 
them whether to know is an active, and to be known a passive 
verb; and whether Being therefore, so far as known, is not 
acted upon 1 And here, apart from logic, the reflection rises, 
that Perfect Being cannot be devoid of life and movement, and 
the power of thought. That which has thought has life, that 
which has life has a soul, and that which has a soul cannot be 
motionless. And yet it is most true that reason could not 
exist nor come into being without uniformity and permanence, 
which imply a principle of rest in the object of reason. Being 
therefore has both Motion and Rest. But Being is neither 
Motion nor Rest. We are in the position of the dualists whom 
we compelled to admit a third principle. Motion and Rest are 
opposites, yet both exist. Being therefore comprehends both, 
and is different from both, and though essentially partaking 
both of motion and rest, in its own nature neither rests nor 
moves. In solving this apparent contradiction, we stumble on 
the solution of the original problem of the reconciliation of 
Being and Not-Being. As we endeavour to harmonize the dis- 
cords which have arisen within the sphere of Being, we are led 
to modify our notion of the mutual exclusiveness of Being and 
that which had been hitherto regarded as the opposite of Being. 
1 



Ixxiv INTRODUCTION 

Before proceeding with the argument, we may glance at one 
or two points in the interesting passage which has just been 
analyzed. (Soph. 246-250.) 

Under the titles of the Earth-born and the Friends of Ideas 
docs Plato allude to any particular schools, and, if so, to which 
of those existing round him ? 

It is difficult to bring either description into exact harmony 
with the tenets of any single school. The yrjyevels would 
at first sight appear to be the same who are mentioned in 
the Thesetetus as " stubborn and repellent" men, but are 
there emphatically, though somewhat ironically, distinguished 
from the " disciples of Protagoras :" whereas here the akr]deia 
of Protagoras appears to be brought under the general censure. 
It may be remarked, however, that there is a distinction 
amongst the yrjyeyets also, for some are viewed as more hope- 
lessly irreclaimable than the rest (01 glvt&v cnraproi re kch avro- 
Xdoves). According to this view, Antisthenes may possibly be 
included, but the whole description and the line of argument 
pursued point rather in the direction of a physical school. 
The moral maxims of Democritus, when taken in connexion 
with his general principle, might lay his followers open to the 
criticism here employed. But on the other hand, his analysis 
of the senses makes it improbable that he is alone intended. It 
remains, therefore, most probable that Plato has here idealized, 
if such a paradox may be allowed, the materialistic tendency in 
contemporary thought. In the other description, of the friends 
of motionless forms, there are some marks which answer to 
the Pythagoreans, and others which point rather in the direc- 
tion of Megara. That the Pythagoreans, whose djaznjroi ovaiat 
are very similarly criticized by Aristotle, are intended here, is 
an opinion which Proclus p takes for granted, and which has 
been recently advanced, quite independently as it would seem, 
by a French critic, M. Mallet. That the Megarians are meant, 
has been the common belief, since this was somewhat doubt- 
fully asserted by Schleiermacher. The Pythagoreans certainly 

p Comment, in Parmen. p. 149 ed. crofyovs. A comparison of Parmenides, 

Pont. : iiv fiXv yap Kal irapa rots Uv- Philolaus, and Empedocles shews that 

Bayopeiois r/ irepl rwv elda/v Oeoopia Kal the Eleatic and Pythagorean specula- 

5?;Ao7 Kal avrbs ev 2o<pt<rrjj t£i' elSwv tions were kindred in their origin. 
<pi\ovs •npocrayopfvoov robs if 'IraAf'a 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ixx\ 

believed in purely immaterial forms, and the absence of an 
efficient cause to aid the formal was their weak point. Bui 
there is no evidence that they brought a subtle dialectic to 
bear on the resolution of phenomena. This trait (kclto. apuKpa. 
bcadpavovTes kv rols Koyots) belongs rather to the Megarians : 
and so does the sharp opposition between the flux of Becoming 
and the permanence of Being. This is an Elcatic feature. But 
then although we know that Euclides said that the good was 
" one called by many names," his reaction towards Elcaticism 
would probably, though not certainly, incline him to lay the 
emphasis on " one" rather than on " many/' and we have no 
evidence (this passage apart) that he admitted a real diversity 
of forms. This is one of Socher's grounds for supposing that 
the " Sophist" was written by a Megarian and directed against 
Plato, whose theory of ideas he imagines to be here directly 
impugned. We have seen that however much some of Plato's 
statements (e. g. Orat. 440) may seem to countenance the doc- 
trine here criticized, such was not his final theory of know- 
ledge and being. But the hypothesis of Ueberweg and of 
Mr. Grote, that Plato is here examining a view which he at 
one time held, is well worth considering. 

We shall only make a slight modification of this hypothesis 
in expressing our own opinion that Plato at a late period of 
his course directs this argument against those amongst his 
disciples in the Academy who, resting in their imperfect 
realization of an earlier phase of his own teaching and revert- 
ing to Pythagorean and Eleatic elements, held the doctrine of 
ideas in the form in which it is often controverted by Aristotle. 
That Aristotle should not have observed this divergence be- 
tween the master and the school may be inexplicable, but 
not more so than his silence about the Parmenides. On this 
supposition, the avowal of familiar acquaintance with the men 
(eyeb 8e ttnos bia avvi]9eiav) is not made by the Eleatic Stranger, 
but by Plato himself, whose close relation to the persons indi- 
cated accounts for a peculiar gentleness of tone (e. g. ?^epwrepot 
yap); and the plurality of ideas, their immobility, and the wide 
gulf between Being and the changing world, are tenets which 
we clearly know to have been held together by one and the 
same school. 

This interrogation of the philosophers is one of the earliest 
U 



Ixxvi INTRODUCTION 

chapters in the critical history of philosophy : and approaches 
to the manner in which Anaxagoras and Empedoclcs are 
handled by Aristotle, when he endeavours to penetrate to their 
meaning or inmost tendency through the haze of their lan- 
guage. There is a similar effort made in the TheaetetuB, in 
the development of the theory of sense, where Heraclitus and 
Protagoras are shewn to meet in an unconscious harmony, and 
the same appears in the allusion to Parmenides and the twofold 
difficulty of understanding his expressions and his thought (ixrj 
ovre to, Xeyo^eva £vvi&{j,ev, tC re oiavooviJLevos ei7re ttoXv irkeov Aei- 
7rw/ae0a). But the conception of studying philosophical ideas 
in the light of their history, and almost of the impossibility of 
studying them in any other way, comes more distinctly into 
consciousness in this passage than even in Aristotle. 

There are several points even in these few pages, besides 
the criticism of the eibrj, which confirm the hypothesis that the 
Sophist is a late dialogue. These are chiefly: i. The identi- 
fication of the Highest Being with Soul or Mind, which appears 
with equal distinctness only in the Philebus, Timasus, and Laws. 
2. The abruptness with which this thesis is introduced, not 
suggested directly by the argument but prompted apparently 
by a deep emotional impulse. This is in the manner of the 
Laws. 3. The admission of motion into the intelligible sphere. 
4. The close union of the ideas of Being and Becoming, which 
Plato's earlier speculations had divorced. This notion is ap- 
plied in one place to the Eleatic Whole (245 d, to yevopevov ael 
yeyovev okov), notwithstanding the fact that Parmenides denied 
yeveo-is altogether ; and in another place, in immediate con- 
nexion with the idea of permanence or stability, it is said that 
this kind is necessary to the production as well as the existence 
of mind (249 C, avtv tovtmv vovv naOopqs ovto, t) yei'op.ei'ot/ av ;). 

We return to the argument. The notion of perfect being 
includes the attributes of motion and rest, yet neither of these 
is the same with Being : Being differs from both, and, qua 
Being, neither rests nor is moved. Yet it would seem as if 
everything must either be at rest or in motion. 

Now these contradictions may be solved, if we admit the 
possibility of a relation or intercommunion between different 
kinds. If Being subsists in its own nature and at the same 
time partakes in one respect of rest and in another of motion, 



TO THE SOPHIST. lxxvii 

this perplexity is removed. The same question of the correla- 
tion of ideas or kinds is raised by the simplest instance of pre- 
dication. Every proposition implies a relation between things 
which arc not identical. Even this process has been pro- 
nounced impossible by some, who hold that you cannot say 
" Man is Good/' but only " Man is Man " and " Good is 
Good." Not to pass over any class of thinkers, however ex- 
travagant, we address these belated scholars in common with 
the rest with the following question. Are all ideas totally 
disparate, as these say, or do all admit of indiscriminate inter- 
mixture, or do some enter into relations with each other while 
others do not ? 

If there is no "communion of ideas," (i) motion and rest 
cannot exist, for neither can partake of Being ; and the phi- 
losophy of motion and that of rest are equally undone : and 
so (2) are the philosophies which rest on the union of one and 
many, whether these are viewed as alternating or as being 
always combined, and whether unity or a plurality of elements 
be made the starting-point. But still more sorry (3) is the 
plight of the opponents of predication themselves. For they 
cannot move a step in their own argument without the combi- 
nation of ideas. 

Again, if there is to be commixture of all ideas, motion 
could be predicated of rest, and rest of motion. 

It remains that some ideas admit of union and others do 
not. Just as some letters can be combined in syllables and 
others cannot. And it may be that as the vowels are present 
in all syllables, so there may be a select few amongst the ideas 
whose presence is necessary to every combination. 

But as a science is necessary to determine what combina- 
tions of letters make syllables, and again another science to 
distinguish the proper combinations of musical sounds, so a 
science, namely that of dialectic, is necessary in order to 
determine the true relations of ideas. The dialectician sees 
one form traversing a multitude of scattered objects, and 
several forms embraced in a higher generality : he sees many 
such wholes bound together in one universal notion, and also 
many that are wholly sundered from one another. 

In looking for the Sophist, we have unexpectedly stumbled 
on the philosopher, and we shall know where to look for him 



lx.wiii INTRODUCTION 

when it is his turn to be defined. The Sophist hides in the 
dark cave of Not-Being, wherein he feels his way by the 
trick of use. We lose the philosopher, " as we lose the lark 
in heaven," in an abyss of light, where he clings, by the 
effort of pure reason, to the form of Being. Plato does not 
expressly notice, what his argument however implies, that the 
word "Being" is here used in a new sense. The "Being" 
here spoken of is clearly the object of philosophy, that is of 
dialectic : and the function of dialectic is to determine which 
kinds harmonize and which are mutually exclusive. Hence 
"Being" can be nothing else than the sum or principle of 
true determinations, whether positive or negative. 

But "Being" was previously reckoned, and is again reckoned 
(inf. 254 d), with rest and motion as one of the several kinds 
amongst which the determinations are made. The first notion 
of Being in the Abstract, on which the Eleatic doctrine was 
founded, remains side by side with that of Truth, as consisting 
in the real agreement and disagreement of ideas. The latter 
seems to be expressed by the word ov in the present passage, 
which contains the answer to the question raised in p. 250 a, 
viz. what common quality of opposites is expressed by saying 
that they both exist. Their common quality is (according to 
this) that each is really predicable of some other thing. This 
is almost but not quite expressed inf. 258 b, rj ttjs Oarepov — 
ovata €<ttiv. 

But to proceed. As it is admitted that communion exists 
to a greater or less extent amongst different kinds, some for- 
bidding communion, while some may hold communion with all ; 
we proceed to apply the dialectic method which is now come 
into view to the three chiefest kinds, which have been already 
before us : Being, Motion, Rest. The two latter, as was said 
above, have no communion : while Being communes with them 
both. Each of these three is other than the remaining two, 
but the same with itself. Thus emerge two fresh and distinct 
kinds, or categories, holding communion with the three already 
mentioned, but different from them all, the categories of Same 
and Other. They are certainly both distinct from Rest and 
from Motion, for if either of these were identical with that in 
which both participate, they would be obliged to participate 
in each other, which we have seen to be in the highest degree 



TO THE SOPHIST. kxix 

impossible. Nor can Sameness be identified with Being, else 
in asserting that motion and rest exist, we should assert that 
they were both the same. Thus are made out four distinct 
kinds : motion, rest, being, same. The form of Other alone 
remains. Is this a fifth kind, or are Being and Otherness two 
names for the same thing ? They are distinct, for this reason, 
that every Other is always relative to an Other, whereas Beings 
are sometimes thought of in themselves and sometimes in rela- 
tion. (Aristotle's category of Relation is here incidentally 
anticipated.) 

The form of Otherness is therefore a fifth kind ; and, to- 
gether with that of Sameness, it is found in combination with 
everything, like the vowels in the illustration from letters. 
(These two in fact are the positive and negative aspects, which 
are indissolubly connected in the notion of Being, as defined 
above.) 

In applying this discovery we find that Otherness is more 
simply expressed by the word " not." Motion is quite other 
than Rest ; i. e. is not Rest : — is other than Sameness ; i. e. is 
not Sameness. Yet Motion is, i. e. exists : and is the same with 
itself through participation in Sameness. In these different 
senses or relations, Motion is and is not the same : partaking 
of Sameness in relation to itself and of Otherness (expressed by 
the word "not") in relation to sameness. So if motion could 
partake of rest, it might be said, " Motion is at rest and is not 
Rest." And it is certainly true that Motion being other than 
the Other, i. e. partaking of Otherness in relation to the 
Other, in the same phrase both is and is not Other. Thus 
Motion is distinct from three of the four kinds, partaking 
of the Other in relation to each: and it is also distinct 
from, and partakes of the Other in relation to, Being. But 
Motion also partakes of Being, and thus both is and is not 
Being. 

Now this applies equally to every kind. All partake of 
Being, for they all exist, but each is distinguished from the 
abstract, or universal, notion of Being. They are and are not, 
are existent but are not existence. Being and Not-Being are 
equally predicable of every form. And, if this result is turned 
the other way, — the form of Being is distinguished from 
(partakes of Other in relation to) all other forms. Being is in 



Ixxx INTRODUCTION 

itself once for all, but is-noi times infinite, viz. in comparison 
with everything which partakes of being. 

It appears then that Non-Being includes everything except 
the abstract idea of Being ; and that the word not expresses 
only otherness or difference, and not necessarily contrariety. 
The not-greater is not necessarily smaller. Now every posi- 
tive conception has a corresponding negative, which is not 
necessarily opposite but only different, and includes a really 
existing kind. Thus the not-beautiful is a kind by itself. The 
word " not 11 distinguishes between positive existences ; and 
the Other has as many branches as science has. 

It follows that negative determinations have as much objec- 
tive reality as the positive ones which are summed up in 
Being i : and they signify when taken severally, not the con- 
tradictory of the corresponding affirmatives, but only some- 
thing not identical with them. Now the sum of these nega- 
tions, or of their objects, is no other than the non-existent or 
unreal, after which the Sophist led us such a dance. 

We have not only established against Parmenides that this 
Non-Being has a real existence, but we have also laid bare the 
nature of it as the sum of negations, or of all which falls on 
the left-hand side in the distinctions of science. 

(Plato here notes a change in the meaning of jut) ov similar 
to that above noticed in the meaning of ov. The merely ab- 
stract notion of Nothing seems at first sight contradictory to 
the merely abstract notion of Being. But when Being is re- 
cognized as the complex object of the determinations of thought, 
Not-Being becomes the negative side or aspect of those deter- 
minations, and is thus a part of being. Moreover every such 
negative expression, from the nature of the case, since nega- 
tion is difference and difference always implies relation (to 
erepov ael npbs trepov), has a positive content.) 

Further, while we have shewn the existence of non-being, 
we have proved that Being in innumerable relations is not, 
i. e. is different from, or other than, every existing kind. 

Being and difference (or positive and negative Being 1 ) are 
two categories (to use a convenient term of later growth) which 

q " Being" is here used with a third r The ideas of to.vtov and ov seem 

variety of meaning = the sum of posi- to run together again, though distin- 
tive determinations. guished for the sake of argument above. 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxxi 

traverse all things — even each other, since the Other exists, 
and Being is other than the remaining kinds, which partake 
of Being, and of the Other in relation to each other and to the 
form of Being. 

Here is a nut for the Eristic philosophers to crack. They 
may exhibit contradictions till they are weary, but until they 
can refute the preceding argument, they will labour in vain. 
The dialectician's is a far nobler task, to follow every argument 
having respect to the relation in which things are compared 
or distinguished. To insist without this on the contradiction of 
sameness and difference is mere childishness, as has now been 
shewn. We have swept the ground from under the feet of 
the analytical and controversial gentry, by abolishing the 
absoluteness of distinctions : which indeed was necessary 
if argument, or even language, is to be maintained at all. 
For, as has been already shewn in answer to Antisthenes, 
the nature of proposition rests on the combination of different 
forms. 

But if language were done away, all our toil would have 
left us where we were, so far as the Sophist is concerned. 
For falsity can only be found in propositions, either spoken or 
silent. Opinion is silent proposition. 

There still remains, therefore, a new problem, after it has 
been decided that there is a communion amongst several kinds, 
and that Non-Being is one of these ; viz. Is there communion 
between Non-Being and the proposition ? Does that which is 
other than being enter into language ? We must answer this 
before we can tell whether the Sophist is to be accused of 
falsehood, and, if the answer is in the negative, we must begin 
the whole inquiry afresh. 

Thesetetus is cast down by the apparition of this new diffi- 
culty : but is encouraged to proceed. " Faint heart never took 
a city. Some progress has been made, and that is more than 
we at one time expected. And after all not much remains." 
Speech is then defined as the combination not of nouns with 
nouns or verbs with verbs, but of nouns and verbs (which are 
also defined) — just as vowels and consonants were seen to be 
combined in syllables. 

It is shewn also that every proposition has a subject and 
is of a certain quality ; by which is meant, not the formal 



Ixxxii INTRODUCTION 

difference of affirmative or negative, but the material difference 
of truth or falsity. 

The false proposition attaches to its subject a predicate, which 
lias a meaning indeed, but a meaning other than that which 
consists with fact (oi/rwv — ovra hepa, Soph. 263 b) ; a meaning, 
therefore, which is the proper object of a negative determi- 
nation in thought. False speech is the affirmation of this other 
predicate, which means, not nothing, but a wrong something. 
(It is of course implied that false negation is the wrong affirma- 
tion of non-being.) Now thought is a silent dialogue of the 
mind with herself (cf. Theost. 189 e) : opinion is the positive or 
negative determination of thought : and imagination is opinion 
in contact with sense. Hence whatever is essentially true of 
speech, is also true of thought, opinion and the intellectual 
element in sensation. False opinion is therefore conceivable 
and possible. And the phantastic art, in which we placed the 
Sophist, has more than a chimerical existence. The existence 
of the said "kind" being vindicated, the division of kinds is 
resumed from p. 236 c in the manner already indicated, and 
the dialogue ' ' grows to a point." 

In closing this long introduction, it is still necessary, for the 
sake of clearness, to make a few remarks on the discussion of 
which an analysis has been here presented to the reader. 

1. The last step in the argument will be more intelligible 
when put into modern language. 

It has been shewn that Non-Being is merely the object of 
negative determination : the form of Difference, coming in be- 
tween two positive conceptions. Before the existence of false- 
hood can be established, the question remains, Are thought 
and speech themselves ever the proper objects of negative 
determination ? Can a proposition as well as a term be denied ? 
Does the Form of Difference enter into thought as the object 
of thought, so as to divide the real (ov in the sense of Truth) 
from the unreal (jU7j ov— that which is other than the Truth) 
which still has a certain reality as being really distinguished 
from the real ? Plato answers this question, as he answers the 
question in the Theaetetus, " Is true opinion knowledge 1" by 
an appeal to fact. The proposition, " Theaetetus, with whom I 
now converse, is flying," is manifestly the legitimate object of 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxxiii 

denial. And thus the existence of falsehood; and of ;i denial 
of falsehood, as well as that of simple negation, is established. 
It may be asked, why sensation takes the place of dialectic at 
this stage ? Might not the Sophist, who can shut his eyes at 
pleasure, profess ignorance, until convinced by rational proof, 
whether Thesetctus is sitting or flying ? The answer is, first, 
that it was immaterial to the proof whether the fact appealed 
to were one of sensible experience or otherwise. Any propo- 
sition which the mind of the particular hearer instinctively 
rejected would have served the purpose equally well. A fact 
of sense is chosen, according to the law of parsimony, as being 
the simplest. And, secondly, all the dialectical difficulties had 
been surmounted, and the question of fact alone remained. 
It had been shewn that non-being existed, and that different 
kinds might be combined in thought. The only doubt left was 
whether a combination of non-being with thought and speech 
was possible. All combinations are equally possible or impos-J 
sible in the abstract. The existence of any particular combi-j 
nation is a question of fact. The combination of rest and motion 
was proved impossible by an appeal to mental experience. That 
of thought with non-being happens to be proved by an appeal 
to an opinion based on sense (qbaLverai 8' o Aeyo/xev o-i^xifis 
aia8ri(X€oos kcu bo£r)s). The example is chosen from <pavTaa[a 
rather than hiavoia or Sofa. But this is an accident which 
does not in the slightest degree affect the validity of the 
argument. 

% The definition of Koyos as the combination of ovofxa and 
prjfxa, and as a positive or negative determination (cpdcnv re kclI 
airofyaaiv) , is the earliest clear account of the proposition. It 
was seen in examining the Thesetetus (Theset. Introd. p. Ixxiv.), 
and has been evident in the course of this dialogue, with how 
much difficulty the Greeks formed the conception of the rela- 
tion of subject and predicate. But in this passage not only is 
it asserted that every predicate must have a subject (koyov 
avayKcuov twos elvat Koyov), but the words expressive of sub- 
ject and predicate (nouns and verbs 8 ) are for the first time 
accurately distinguished and defined. Now this is in a great 
measure due to the preceding argument, in which Being is 

s See the instructive excursus of ovojxa and prifxa in the Cratylus, Ueber 
Benfey on the meaning of the word3 die Aufgabe des Kratylos, p. 1 39. 

m 2 



Ixxxiv INTRODUCTION 

declared to be the relation of ideas, and to the subversion of 
the extreme view of those who held that a <tvjat:\okt) t&v elb&v 
was impossible. 

3. The psychological definitions in pp. 263 d — 264 b also 
demand a passing notice. They mark a stage in the develop- 
ment of Plato's psychology more advanced than that in the 
Thesetetus (contrast Thcset. 189 e — jyo a with the brief sum- 
mary bo£a — biavoias cnroTeAevrijiTis), and nearly corresponding to 
that in the Philebus ; (sec especially Philcb. 33-41). The grada- 
tions (aXo-6r\(ri<5, cpavTavia, bo£a, biavoia, Ao'yos) are almost in the 
manner of Aristotle; (cf. Met. 1. 1, and compare Legg. 892 b, 
Ao'£a — ml cirifxeketa kcu vovs kcu Ttyvr] kcu vop.os ctkXiip&v koX 
IxaKaKcov kcu fiapiav kcu Kovcpcov irporepa av e'67). Now just as 
the beginning of a sound logic by the definition of the propo- 
sition was impossible so long as Being and Non-Being were 
viewed in their incommunicable abstraction ; so the absolute 
severance of knowledge from opinion had been an impediment 
to the growth of an inductive psychology. Both hindrances 
are removed by the preceding argument : and to this may be 
referred the increasing clearness in which logical and psycho- 
logical questions are viewed. 

It remains to say a few words on the general reasoning. 
The whole energy of the piece is spent on the metaphysical 
question of the possibility of error, or false appearance. The 
arguments by which the Sophist is entrapped in the form of 
non-being are comparatively trifling : and the refutation of 
particular tenets is obviously left over to another day. The 
form of non-being itself remains the cardinal point of interest 
and difficulty. The solution is obtained through a modification 
of the notions of Being and Negation, which by a process of 
dialectic are brought out of their first naked abstraction, and 
are shewn to be logical determinations, both of which are 
necessarily present in every conception, i. e. in every act of 
thought. It is found impossible to maintain the sole existence 
of a Being which is identical with itself, but has no other rela- 
tions : and true being, as necessarily comprising reason and 
life, is shewn to partake of the opposite elements of perma- 
nence and change. 

" Being," at this point, is equivalent to the " sum of all posi- 
tive notions." But in contemplating the union of being with 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxxv 

permanence and change, two thoughts arise : first, that nega- 
tion in the form of difference pervades all things, separating 
every form from every other ; and, secondly, that this sepa- 
ration is not necessarily absolute, and docs not exclude the 
possibility of relations between the forms thus separated. The 
separation is as essential to thought as the communion, and 
hence arises a third notion of Being, as the sum of true deter- 
minations, both positive and negative. This new form (by the 
"gliscens intellectus" of dialectic) is again distinguished from 
that which is not Being (which is unreal or false), which how- 
ever, according to the theory, partakes of Being, if in no other 
way, as being the object of true negative determination. 

A close perusal of the dialogue will convince the reader that 
Plato is not here engaged in impugning the axiom of contra- 
diction. That axiom, though not expressly brought forward, 
is tacitly assumed throughout. It is taken for granted that an 
assertion or negation cannot at once be true and not true in the 
same sense and in the same respect ; (see especially the words 
in 259 d : Ka(9' eKaarov £\£yyovTa ktiaKokovOeiv, orav re tls erepoy 

OV TTTJ TCLVTOV tlvClL (pjj KCU OTCtV TCLVTOV OV €TtpOV, £k€LVTJ KCU KCLT 

e/cetz/o (pr\cri tovtohv Tte-novdivai norepov). This is not formally 
drawn out : for Plato is engaged rather with thought than 
language, and passes by the formal to grapple with the real ; 
but is nowhere ignored, much less denied. Nor is it quite 
true that negation is merged in affirmation. But what hap- 
pens is this. When it is found that Being, though an omni- 
present notion, is inconceivable without the help of others 
from which it is distinguished, it becomes evident that not- 
being is not equivalent to nothingness, but in one sense in- 
cludes the forms which are distinguished from Being; and 
generally that the negation of a term is implicitly the predi- 
cation of all which is not included in that term : — when a 
thing is not-beautiful, it is to be sought for amongst the mis- 
cellaneous class of objects of which beauty cannot be predi- 
cated. All negation therefore is limitation, and in so far deter- 
mination. The meaning of this is evident and important in 
connexion with scientific inquiry. Every exclusion and rejec- 
tion is a step in the direction of discovery. The sum of these 
exclusions is Non-Being. Thirdly, it is shewn that where iden- 
tity is denied, participation may still exist. Things different 



Ixxxvi INTRODUCTION 

are not necessarily opposite*. The same thing may partake 
of two things which arc different from it and from each other. 
This is the communion of kinds. 

Another objection is more plausible, viz. : that Plato is de- 
ceived by language and has confused together three distinct 
notions under the name of Being : namely, Existence, Identity, 
and Participation. We have seen that he passes from the bare 
notion of Existence to that of determination in thought : and 
that under this notion of determination he himself carefully 
distinguishes between participation and identity. How then, 
it may be asked, does he include these different relations under 
the same term ov '! For the same reason, it may be answered, 
for which he assigns ovaCa to non-being, viz. that Being has 
come to mean reality, or the sum of true determinations. Par- 
ticipation, as such, is no less real than identity. 

It has been unavoidable, in the preceding sketch, to trans- 
late Plato's thoughts into language somewhat more subjective 
than is in perfect keeping with the tenor of ancient philosophy. 
Or rather the distinction of object and subject, imperfectly 
known to Plato, has for the sake of clearness been applied 
throughout. This may perhaps, however, be excused, if his 
real meaning (ti biavoovixeuos ei7re) has been made at all more 
intelligible to the English reader. And if his speculations have 
been rightly interpreted, it may be left to professed meta- 
physicians to determine their value. 

The criticism of Aristotle on the Platonic doctrine of ISTon- 
Being (Met. N. 1089), though in parts irrelevant to this dialogue, 
yet bears to it nearly the same relation which his remarks on 
the Platonic numbers bear to the Philebus. The cosmological 
notion of Non-Being as necessary to production, to which he 
chiefly adverts, may perhaps be traced in the Tmiseus, but is 
wholly alien to the purpose of the " Sophist." Plato or his 
followers may have latterly said that the phenomenal Uni- 
verse would be impossible without an element of falsehood, 
but no such observation occurs, or could occur in the course 
of the discussion which we have reviewed. Yet there are 

* For Plato's definition of Opposites, see Phsed. 103 b ; and cf. Repub. 4, 
436 e. 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxxvii 

indications that Aristotle, when writing the passage in ques- 
tion, had this dialogue in his eve. Such are, (i) the language 
in which the quotation from Parmcnidcs is introduced, espe- 
cially the words avayKi] elrai to fii] ov bei£ai otl €<ttw. (In the 
next phrase, however, ovtw — el ttoWcl kariv, the writer's 
memory seems for once to have wandered to the Farmenides.) 
(2) The expression Tavrrjv ti]v ^uctic Ae'yei t6 ovk ov. His recol- 
lection of Plato's writings is partly derived from and partly 
tinged by the conversations which he has held with younger 
Academicians. Of the arguments which he adduces only two 
are applicable to the " Sophist :" — That to proceed by a criti- 
cism of Parmenides was in effect to revive the philosophy of 
an earlier age (airop^aai apxa'lK&s) ; and that Being and Not- 
Being have each several meanings, and these are not distin- 
guished by Plato. 

It has been already shewn that the negative side of the 
philosophy of Parmenides was still powerful when Plato wrote, 
and that he Avas probably right in viewing it as the ttp&tov 
\jrevbos of the modes of thinking in his own and other schools, 
which interfered with the real progress of inquiry. The 
accusation of an " old-fashioned" way of putting the question, 
only means that Plato did not take for granted the distinc- 
tions which Aristotle, building on the foundation of his pre- 
decessor, afterwards introduced. These distinctions are, how- 
ever, not strictly relevant to the matter in hand. For, as 
Aristotle himself observes, there are positive and negative 
determinations under all the categories. And although the 
affirmation or negation of quality or quantity is not identical 
with, but only analogous to, that of substance ; yet the word 
" analogy" does not explain the relative significance of affir- 
mation and negation generally. With regard to " falsity," 
which, it may be presumed,, is also to be found under all the 
categories, and which Aristotle conceives to be the principal 
meaning of Plato's jut) ov, it has been shewn above that the term 
is so extremely abstract as almost to supersede the distinction 
between falsity and denial. That which is falsely predicated 
is truly denied, and vice versa. Falsehood, in Plato's sense, 
arises when Not-Being is predicable of speech or thought, 
and this happens when Not-Being is affirmed or Being denied. 

The other species of Not-Being to which Aristotle alludes is 



Ixxxviii INTRODUCTION 

his own principle of potentiality, which w in one sense bat is 
not in another^ is potentially, but not actually, existent: the 
same which he also compares with the uirapov of the Philebus, 
and the aireipos bv&s of the Platonists. This, he says, is the 
real "other" which along with the form enables us to account 
for production. But, as we have said, Plato is not here en- 
gaged in accounting for production; and, to use Aristotle's 
own language, this hvvap.zi. 6v is /uwj 6v only /caret avpfteftrjKos. 
And the converse is equally true. In saying (e a cloud is not 
a shower," we are only incidentally interested in the question 
whether a cloud can be converted into a shower. Whether 
this be so or not, the meaning of the negative proposition 
remains the same. That the notions "cloud" and "shower," 
although separated by the negative particle, may still bear 
to each other a relation such as that of the potential to the 
actual, is a truth which could not easily have won acceptance 
before the " Sophist" was written. 

This question, like that of the unity of Good, brings into 
strong relief the different genius of the two philosophers, 
universality being Plato's watchword, and distinctness that of 
Aristotle. 

It may be worth while to see how Aristotle himself answers 
Parmenides in the opening of the lectures on Physics. (Physic. 
Auscult. I. 3.) " Parmenides did not see that Being has 
several meanings, and that each kind of being, although one 
in meaning, yet in point of continuity is many. For there is 
a difference, which philosophers in those days had not per- 
ceived, between whiteness and that to which whiteness attaches. 
Substance and attribute exist in a different sense (to ehat erepov). 
But those who assert the unity of Being, must hold that what- 
ever is said to exist, exists as substance. Otherwise that which 
happens to exist (which partakes of existence) is other than 
Being. And hence there will exist something which has no 
existence. For nothing has existence (ex hypothesi) but the 
form of Being. No particular thing can have existence, unless 
Being is allowed to signify a plurality of things in the sense 
which makes this possible. For if essential Being cannot be 
an attribute, Being may signify that which is not as well as 
that which is. For to speak of a white thing as white is truth, 
i. e. Being : but whiteness is a distinct notion from essence ; 



TO THE SOPHIST. Ixxxix 

and therefore, ex hypothesi, is not, in the most absolute sense. 
Therefore Being is not ; which is absurd, therefore Being must 
signify a plurality. 

" Again, if essential Being is one, it can have no extension ; 
for there will then be a difference of parts. But the parts 
even of a logical whole exist as essentially as the whole ; for 
they are not mere accidents, even of the kind which implies 
the definition of the subject : (as, for instance, the accident of 
snubness implies a nose). The elements of concrete existence 
(matter, form, to e£ aixfyoiv) have each an indivisible existence : 
and the notion of each is different. The Atomists perceived 
something of this, when they attempted, while admitting that 
if being has one meaning, all must be one, to introduce diver- 
sity by the assertion of the existence of Not-Being, and by 
breaking up the continuity of Being into particles. But even 
if it be granted that Being has one meaning, and the con- 
tradictory of being cannot exist, there may still be Not-Being ; 
for this may mean not absolute non-entity, but the negation 
of some particular Being . On the whole, it is most unreason- 
able to say that all things will be one unless there is some- 
thing besides Being. For who understands what is meant by 
Being, unless particular substances are meant ? But if this be 
so, nothing prevents a plurality of Beings in the sense indi- 
cated above." 

This dialogue, although not generally thought the most 
attractive of Plato's writings, has at least twice received signal 
attention from great philosophers. By the JNeo-Platonists, 
Plotinus and Proclus, the words of the " Eleatic Stranger" 
are quoted no less frequently than those of Socrates : and the 
five categories, Being, Motion, Rest, Sameness, Difference, 
are deliberately preferred by them to the ten of Aristotle. 
(Plotin. Ennead. 5, 1-3 ; 6, 1-3.) More recently, Hegel 
found in the Sophist not only the highest point reached by 
Plato, but an anticipation of his own dialectic ; and he enhances 
the resemblance by a curious mistranslation of the passage 
259 d : ro TavTa idaavTa — veoyevtjs <x>v. " Das Schwere unci 
Wahrhafte ist dieses, zu zeigen, dasz das, was das Andere ist, 
Dasselbe ist, und, was Dasselbe ist, ein Anderes ist : und zwar 
in derselben Riicksicht, und nach derselben Seite, dasz das 
Eine ihnen geschehen ist, wird auch die andere Bestimmung an 



xc INTllODUCTlOxN TO THE SOPHIST. 

ihncn aufgezeigt. Dagcgcn zu zeigen, das Dasselbe auf irgcnd 
cine AVeiso cin Andercs, und das Andcrc auch Dassclbe, dasz 
das Grosze auch kloin JJ (z. B. Protagoras 1 Wurfel), " und das 
Aenliche auch un'ahnlich scy, und scin Gefallen daran haben, 
so durch Griinde immer das Entgcgcngcsetzte vorzubringen, 
— dicsz ist keine wahrhafte Einsiclit (eAey^os), und offenbar das 
Erzcugniss eines Neulings," ira Denken, " welcher erst das 
Wcsen zu beriihrcn anfangt;" (Werke, vol. 14. p. 210. ed. 
1840.) 

Both the ancient and the modern appreciation were in- 
fluenced by preconceptions ; and supposed a dogmatic and sys- 
tematic intention which is not to be found in Plato. Whether 
the movement of modern philosophy, from Spinoza through 
Kant to Hegel, is in any respects analogous to that which has 
now been traced from Parmenides through the Plato of the 
Phaedrus to the Plato of the Sophist, is a question which it 
belongs to the historian of philosophy to decide. 






2 0*1 2TH2 



20$I2TH2. 



T.I. 

jd.Steph. 

b. 2 1 6. 



ta tot AiAAoroT npomnA 

6EOAOP05;, 2QKPATH2,£EN02 EAEATH2, 
0EAITHTO2. 

J\ATA ttjv y6e$ ofioXoylap, co ^coKpares, rjKOfiev 



i. The word a-o^ia-r^s, like 
many others in Plato (e. g. 

Aoyos, 8idvoia, yevecris, crTOi^eioi/, 

o-co/xa), may be observed in 
the act of passing from the 
common or vernacular, to- 
wards a technical and philo- 
sophical use. When Aristo- 
tle defines the Sophist xPW a - 

tktttjs ano <paivop.evrjs (rotfiias aXK 

owe ovcrrjs, he gives the name 
a meaning which had no exist- 
ence before Socrates, and which 
became fixed only through the 
present dialogue. In Men. 85 b 
Socrates, addressing the slave, 
employs the word inthe mostpo- 

pular sense : Kakovai 8e ye ravrrjv 
diafxerpov oi ao<pi(TTal. Here the 
geometers are called trocpia-Tai, 
as the poets were by Pindar, be- 
cause practising a clever thing 

(cro<pi£6p.evoi ti (ToCpurp-a) beyond 

the reach of ordinary men. That 
the name thus used acquired an 
association of ignorant dislike, 
mingled either with contempt 
or fear, appears from two places 



in the Prometheus of Aeschylus, 
where the wise Titan is so 
called by the servile ministers 

of Zeus (1. 62 : KP. tva p.a6r] 

ao(piarTT]s (contriver) &v Aibs va>- 
6e<TTepos. 1. 946 : 'EP. ae tou ao- 
(pta-Tijv (thou who meddlest with 
deep matters) top Tnnpais vnepm- 
Kpov). It was with something of 
a similar feeling that the con- 
servative Athenian citizen spoke 
of the public teachers of the 
Socratic age. See the words of 
Anytus in the Meno, 91c, where 
this hatred finds an extreme 
expression. The sentiment 
with which they were regarded 
must have had various phases, 
from this utter abhorrence to 
the eager interest and curiosity 
of Hippocrates (Prot.310), who 
however (lb. 312 a) would not 
for the world be himself taken 
for a Sophist. There was added 
to the jealousy, fear of an 
influence not understood (lb. 
316 c), the sort of caste-anti- 
pathy with which the Athenian 



Prelude. 
True to the 
appoint- 
ment of the 
previous 
day(Theset. 



HAATQNOS 



sui.. fin.) avTOt. re Kocr/jLtcos kou rovSe 
Tlieodorua 

i'"; 1 Tilr "; gentleman looked on those who 
tetus meet 2 „ , ,,. 
Socrates in followed any trade. ( I. also 
the same Lach. 197 tl : irpeirei 

. . . cro(f>i<TTi] paWov to. rotavra 
K<lfJL\l/€Vflfdat fj dv8[H k. t. X. 

The " Sophists" in Plato's time 
were already commonly viewed 
as a separate class. Cf. Tim. 
19 e, Rep. 6, 492 a. Plato — 
who, as we learn from Plutarch 
in his life of Dion, was himself 
called Sophist by the courtiers 
of Syracuse (cf. Polit. 299 c, 
where the true philosopher is 
called by the vulgar adoXeo-x 7 !" 
Tivh aocpKTTTjv, and inf. 216 e : 
Tore 8e o-ofao-rai) — endeavours in 
this and the following dialogue 
to limit the application of the 
term, with the odium belong- 
ing to it, to that false or pre- 
tended wisdom which he desires 
to distinguish from the true — 
to the professors of knowledge 
who " had their reward" a- 
mongst his contemporaries. 
And the termination, -l<ttt)s, 
which might imply affectation 
or pretension, was conducive 
to this purpose. In a similar 
spirit the meaning of the 
word SiaXeKTiKos was modified 
by Aristotle. The necessity of 
defining the Sophist is asserted 
by Socrates in Protag. 313 c. 

P. 1, 3. 2QKPATH2] Here, as 
in the Parmenides and Timaeus, 
Socrates introduces but does 
not conduct the conversation 
(Tim. 17 b: TI. ovBi yap av 
f'irj 8iKawv, x#«s vtto (tov £evi- 
crdevras ols f)v npenov t-eviois, 
fir) ov Trpodvficos (ri tovs Xoiirovs 
rjpav avrecpecrrtau. lb. 26 e: 2J2. 
Xpr/ \eyew fxev v/xas, ifie 8e avri tcov 
X@£S \6y(i3V Tjcrvxiav ayeiv). But 

although the person of Socrates 



Ttva ^tvov dyo/iev, TO fxtv \>. urn 

is in the background, the So- 
cratic spirit of inquiry still 
reigns in this ami the follow- 
ing dialogue. There arc at 
leasl four points in which this 
intellectual (as distinguished 
from the personal) influence of 
Socrates may still be traced. 
1. The use of trivial and gro- 
tesque examples to illustrate 
general truths (see Xen. Memo- 
rabilia I. 2. § 23, and compare 
the words of Callicles in the 
Gorgias, 491 a : del enevrias re 
Kat Kvafaas Ka\ payelpovs Aeytof 
kol larpovs ovbev Travel), and the 

elevation of this practice into 
a principle of scientific method. 
The angler has a definition no 
less than the highest artist. 
Philosophical classification re- 
spects not persons, but views 
the military commander and 
the destroyer of vermin as 
ecmally deserving a place in 
the category of huntsmen. The 
Sophist is a salesman, a magi- 
cian, a sportsman, a scene- 
painter. The image of the 
" herdsman" (compare Xen. 
Mem. 1. a), used satirically in 
the Thesetetus (p. 174 d) and 
in Rep. 1, and with a more 
serious meaning in the Laws 
(4, 713 b, c), appears again in 
the Politicus, at first in the hu- 
morous but afterwards in the 
deeper signification. In the 
same dialogue an elaborate pa- 
rallel is drawn between the 
statesman and the weaver, and 
this leads to a vindication of 
the argument from Example. 
Here also the Socratic mode 
of teaching by instances (coin- 
ciding with the Pythagorean 
parable) is not only imitated 



20<I>I2TH2. 



216. yeuos e£ 'EAear, eraipov 8e tu>v u/x(fA Ylapuzvi&riv 



but is made the object of re- 
flection and study. 2. The con- 
viction, which appears chiefly 
in the Politicus, that all prac- 
tical wisdom may be resolved 
into pure knowledge, aud that 
this master-science is one only, 
and stands in close relation to 
all others. 3. The destructive, 
cross-questioning method of 
Socrates is characterised as a 
purgation of the soul (i<a8app.6s, 
a Pythagorean word) from the 
vapours and obstructions of 
conceit. It is this true puri- 
fication of the mind, the in- 
alienable privilege of the phi- 
losopher, of which the mere 
controversial art of the So- 
phist is a false mimicry. 
In this, however, there is also a 
reference to the negative dialec- 
tic of Zeno. 4. The irony of this 
dialogue (and still more of the 
Politicus) while truly Platonic 
accords Avell with the charac- 
ter of the Platonic Socrates. 
The position assigned to the 
Sophist, not in the first, nor 
in the second, nor in the third 
portion of imitative art ; and 
the discovery of the politicians 
of Greece far down amongst the 
class of servants, are instances 
of this : also the ludicrous de- 
scription of a state in which 
navigation and medicine should 
be regulated by law, of which 
there is perhaps a germ in 
the question of Socrates, Would 
they choose a pilot, or a car- 
penter, or a flute-player by 
lot 1 ? In these and other pas- 
sages there is revived, with 
an increase of bitterness which 
is Plato's own, the " pro- 
voking irony and strange in- 



sight into the world," which is 
one of the most marked fea- 
tures of the Platonic, as it was 
probably of the real, Socrates. 

P. 1 , 4. Kara ttjv x@* s 6po\oyiav\ 
Theret. 210 c. Socrates is 
already at the place of meet- 
ing : according to the These- 
tetus a palaestra, possibly the 
Lyceum, or the school of Tau- 
reas. There is, however, no 
reference to the scene of the 
conversation, either in this dia- 
logue or the next. 

{jicopev avroL re Kai aynpev'j 
Rep. 4, 427 d : (TKOirei — qvtos re 
teal top d8e\(f)6v irapaKaXei. Cf. 

also Xen.Anab.III. i, §44. The 
expression is modified by a re- 
turn to the indicative mood, 
as the sentence grows under 
the author's hand. 

P. 2, 1 . Koafiims] " Like well- 
behaved people." " As in duty 
bound." 

t. eralpov "feratpowf] Se- 
veral MSS. have erepov in the 
first place. (Ficinus, longe vero 
alterum ac dissimilem a Par- 
menide et Zenone suis requa- 
libus.) But the Stranger 
afterwards identifies himself 
with the followers of Parme- 
nides, though he is not a ser- 
vile follower, and Socrates in 
this place alludes to the e'Xey- 
xos of Zeno. The corrup- 
tion may be due to some one 
who thought the criticism of 
Parmenides in the sequel incon- 
sistent with the words as they 
stood. The passage is thrice 
quoted by Proclus; Comment, 
in Parmen. p. 42 : 'AXXa km 6 

'Y.Xedrrjs aexfios Kai twv irepl tov 
YIappevi8r]v kol Zrjvoova eraipav ai- 
tos &>u. lb. p. 7 2 - naiyap entlvov 



]i;,i;':;l 1:1. 

and bring 
with t!i(.'in 
an Eleatic 
friend, 

whom 



B 2, 



nAATQNOS 



Theodoras 
introduces 
us a true 
philoso- 
pher. 

Socrates is 
awe-struck. 
" What if 
h« I"' some 
God in dis- 
guise, who, 
as pouts 



KCU Z)/va>i>a •\'€Taipaii>'\', fxrxAa St uvdpa (f)iAo- p. 2lfl 
au(j)oi'. 

20. ' Ap ovv, eo Qeodtope, ov ^evov uAAa tlvol 
6ebv ayoiv Kara rov 'Q/jujpou Aoyov AeAr)$a? ; oy 
5 (f»](Tii> aAAouy re Oeov? roh uudpcQirois, onocroL /xere- b 



ovroi npoaeiprjKfv, eratpov tuiv 
ap(jn II. kci\ Z. pdXa 8e uvdpa 
(pi\6cro(pov . II). p. 83 : iraipos 
Tovnov vrriipxuv, \iraipa>v\ is pro- 
bably a gloss 011 rav. (Bodl. tov.) 
The word is transposed in one 
MS. (A), which gives iralpav kui 
tfvava. It is doubtful whether 
t&v is a partitive genitive or 
governed by iraipov : — "A com- 
panion of the number of those" 
or " a companion of those." 
The former is more idiomatic, 
gives a better emphasis to irai- 
pov, and is on the whole more 
consistent with the quotations 
of Proclus. 

For the use of the word 
iraipos, cf. Theset. 180 c : ov 
yap o~oi eraipoi elaiv. " This 

stranger is of Eleatic race, an 
adherent of the school of Par- 
menides and Zeno, and he is 
a true philosopher." 

Avtlvo , ov p.ev koX e'jz 



I . p.dXa St avbpa (JjiX6(Torj>ov] 
( T. Pann. 1 26 b : oldt — n-oXt- 

ral poi flat, pdXa (jjiKutroj.oi. For 
the conjunction of the adverb 
and noun, cf. Legg. 1, 639 b : 
aXXd tivoov o-(j)68pa yvvaiiccbv. 

3. ov £tvov dXXd nva #eoi>] 
The ausvver of Theodorus, 
oi>x ovtos 6 rp. r. £., shews 
that these words of Socrates 
express an ironical fear lest 
the stranger should bring the 
Zenonian negative dialectic to 
bear on his own (i. e. Plato's) 
mode of reasoning. Compare 
Euthyd. 273 e : el 8e vvv dXrj- 
dcos ravTrjv ri]V e7VL0-Tt]p.rjv e'xe- 
tov, lXea> e'lrjTov. dre^i/cos yap 
eycoye a(f)a> u>o-nep 8eco irpoo-ayo- 
pevo). 

4. XeX^oy] Sc. aavrov. Cf. 

Theaet. 180 e. 

5. aXXovs re 6eovs~\ OdvSS. P. 
483-7: 

aXes 8v(Trr}vov dXijrrjv, 



ovkofitv, el fir) ttoxj rts iirovpavioi deos eo-rtv. 
kcil re 6eo\ tjeivoiaiv e'oiKores dXXo8a7rolai.v, 
navroloL reXtBovres, e-n-io-Tpaxpoio-i noXrjas, 
dvdpwTTCov vftptv re Ka\ eiivop.irju e'cfropcovres. 

lb. I. 270, I : 

Zevs 5' eTTtTiprjTaip iKtrdaiv re £eiva>v re, 
^eii/tos, 09 tjeivoio-iv a\C aiSoioio-ie oirrjSei. 
Both these passages are present Greek religion. Bodl. dXXrjXovs : 



to the speaker's mind, but the 
second less distinctly than the 
first : for geivoio-iv is dropped, 
and aldoioicriv taken actively, = 
respectful or merciful. The 
substitution of 6e6s for Zeus-, 
the general for the individual, 
belongs to the later phase of 



but the correction is not by the 
first hand. 

Cf. Legg. 5, 730 a: 6 §ivtos 

imarav §aip.u)v Kal 6eos ra> £evia> 
o-vvenop-evoi Au. lb. 12, 953 e: 
TificovTfs i^iviov Ala. 

(iXXovs n Beovs tu'is di>0pa>nois] 
The apodosis of these words is 



20<I>I2TH2. 



3. 216. 'xpvcriv alSovs St-tcaia?, kou 8r/ koll top i^eviov ov)( 
rJKKTTa 6eov avvo7rabov yiyvoptvov v(3pei? re kul 
tvvo[±ias tcov dvOpcoircov KaOopav. rcl^ ovu dv koll 

aOl TIS OVTO? TCOV KptLTTOVCOV GwllTOLTO^ (pavXoVS 

7][j.as ovtols eV Tois XoyoLs iiroip'op.ei'os re koll e\e'ytjtoi>, 
Oebs cov T19 f:\ey ktikos. 

GEO. Ov\ OVT09 6 Tpoiros, co *2coKpaTc-s, rov tje'vov, 

dAXa fxerpicoTepo? tcov 7repl ray eptdas 1 ecnrovSaKorcou. 

koll jjlol Sok€l Oeos pc-v 6\vrjp ovhapcos eivod, Ohos fXTjV 

c ttclvtcls yap eyco tovs (pi\ocr6(pov? toiovtovs irpocra- 



yopevco. 

absorbed in avvonadov yiyvd- 
fiepop. 

I. Snocroi — StKaias] Said in 
compliment to Theodoras, who, 
in reward for his modest and 
candid temper (see the Thesete- 
tus), may unawares be enter- 
taining a superior being. Com- 
pare the combination of aldcos 
with 81KJ7 in the Protagoras 
(322 c), and in Hesiod. 

4. tu>v KpeiTTovcou] " Some 
higher power," i. e. a God or 
Hero, cf. Legg. 4,718 a : napa 

6ea>v Kai ocroi Kpeirroves rjpcov. 
Euthyd. 291 a : prj ns tcov 
KpeiTTOPOov napcov avra icpdey^aro ' 
Ep. y, 326 e : tones pr)v nvt. t5>v 
xpeiTTOvcov apxyv (3a\e(r6ai twv vxiv 
yeyovoTcov irpaypaTcov. Compare 

Aesch. Prom. 905 : pr/8e Kpeia- 

aovcov [decov] epcos acpvKTOV oppa 
7rpoa8pa.Koi pe. 

5. e7To\j/6pevos] Referring to 
ecpopcovres in the line of Homer. 

7. Ov% OVTOS 6 rpoiros — TOV 

^»ou] Cf. Theast. 145 e : ovx 
ovtos 6 Tponos Beobcopov. 

8. perpiarepos] " More rea- 
sonable." Cf. Thea?t. 161 b : 
dnoSf'i-acrOai perpias. 



tcov nepl rds epibas io-irovha- 
kotojv] Cf. Isocrates Soph. 20 : 

tcov TTtpl Tas ?pi8as KaKivbovpivcov. 
And for eo-novdciKOTcov inf. p. 259 
b, C : etre — X at P ei — TOVS ^dyovs 
s\kcov, ovk aj-ia 7To\\r)s o-rrovdrjs 

icnrovDaKe. The Stranger is re- 
presented as not contentious, 
that the reader may be pre- 
pared for the modification of 
the Eleatic doctrine in what 
follows, and for the general 
scope of the dialogue, which 
tends to deprecate the arts 
of controversy. 

9. dvrjp] In this and similar 
places the MSS. persistently 
give dvrjp. This is equally the 
case in tragedy (e. g. Soph. Aj. 
9 : tvhov yap dvrjp), where the 
quantity proves the presence 
of the article. 

6eios] Cf. Rep. 1, 331 e : 

aocpbs yap nal deios dvrjp (6 2t- 
pcovidr/s) . Phileb. 1 8 b : ehe tis 
6eos eire kcu delos cwdpconos. In 
Legg. i, 626 c, the address d> 
dele occurs — characteristically 
— in the mouth of the Spartan. 

10. toiovtovs] Sc. Be'iovs. Cf. 

Theeet. 154 e, Phsed. 67 a. 



have ■• ung, 

mpa- 

niea the 
good man's 
going, and 
comes to 
exjio.se the 
notbing- 
5 oess of 
Athenian 
wisdom ?" 

Tmeo. "He 
is not con- 
tentious, 
as some 
are: and 
certainly 
10 no God, 
though I 
must call 
him, as I 
do all phi- 
losophers, 
divine." 



nAAmNos 



SoOB."And 
the divine 
philoso- 
pher is also 
rarely dis- 
cerned, and 
often walks 
disguised 
through 
the igno- 
rance of 
other men, 
whose life 
he watches 
from above, 
appearing 
to them 



^Q.. K«Ao3y ye, co r/j/'Ae. touto \uvtol kivSvvc-vu p. liQ 
to yevo? ov iroXv ri paav, oV eros c-l7tc-li>, eivou dia- 
Kpivetv ?/ to too Oeov' irdvv yap avSpes ovtol 
iravToloi (j)avTa^ofiepoi Sia rrjv tcov aXXcov ayvoiav 
ilivLo~Tpco(\mcTi noAija?, oi fxrj 7rXacrTLO? dXX % ovtco? 
(friXocrocpoi, KaOopwvTts v\\ro9c-v tov tcov koltco fiiov, 
Keel Tols fxev Sokovctlv elvat tov /j.rj8c-vo? Tipuoi, rols* 



I. roOro pevrot to yevos~\ The 

more remote purpose of the dia- 
logue appears in these words. 
The definition of the Sophist 
is preparatory to that of the 
philosopher. 

3. to tov 6eov\ Note the sin- 
gular case with the article, ex- 
pi'essing a generalized concep- 
tion — as in tov avdpunrov : Thu- 
cyd. 1, 140. 

tow] "certainly;" almost 
= aTexvas, referring to the words 
of Homer. Compare the use 
of Tvavv ye, ndvu p.ev ovv in re- 
plies. 

4. iravToloi (pavTa^opevoi] (pav- 
tci(. is Substituted for TeXeOovTes 

because the philosophers do not 
really change, but appear in 
various disguises through the 
ignorance of men. Compare 
Rep. 2, 381-2, where there 
is a reference to the same pas- 
sage of Homer. See also 
Timseus 41 a, where the tradi- 
tionary deities are spoken of in 
contradistinction to the hea- 
venly bodies as 00-01 cpaivovrai 
Ka0 y oaop av edeXtoai Qeo'i. 

5. oi fir] 7r\ao-Tios clXX' ovtcos 
<£iAdVoo5oi] " The real, not the 
would-be philosophers." Cf. 
Thea?t. 173 c: Ae'ycopev — irep\ 
tcov Kopv<palcov, tL yap liv tis tovs 
ye (pavXcos 8iaTpij3ovTas ev cpiXo- 

o-o<pia Xe'yot. And see the de- 



scription of the " little bald 
blacksmith" in Rep. 6, 495 e. 
For ttXckttSk;, cf. Legg. i, 642 d : 
d\r]do>s kciI ov tl 7rXacrra)« elo~\v 
ayaOol. lb. 6, 777 d. 

6. KcidopowTts] Echoing nado- 
pav supr., but with the addi- 
tional meaning of " down- 
wards." For Kad. vy\fi'i6ev tov 
twv Kara jBlov, see the digression 
in the Theaetetus 173 b, 175 
c, d. Also Rep. B. 7. 

7. rot? pev boKovaiv — paviK&>s\ 
" The true philosopher appears 
to some men nothing worth : 
to others, worth all the world : 
now he presents the semblance 
of a statesman, now of a public 
teacher : and, again, he may 
give to some men the impres- 
sion that he is clean mad." 
The philosophic spirit is a 
treasure whose value is un- 
known : a pearl of great 
price, for which he who has 
found it will sell all that 
he has : appearing now in the 
practical, now in the specula- 
tive sphere : in both apt to be 
confounded with lower types 
of wisdom by ordinary men, 
who, when they begin to see 
the real issues towards which 
the spirit leads, will brand it 
with the name of foolishness 
or madness. For tov iravros, cf. 
Phsedr. 235 e. The article is 



SOM2TH2. 



<5' aijioi tov iravros' kgu tot€ p.ev ttoXltikoi (f)avTa- 
(ovtoli, tote 8e crcxpiaTai, Tore 8' ecrTtv oh 86£av 
TrapaaxpiVT av cos iravTairacriv t^ovTts paviKco?. 
tov yiivTOi ^evov i]plv r]8ea>? av irvvOavolp^v, el 
(j)iXov avrcp, tl ravff oi nrep\ tov e'/cet tottov rjyouvTO 5 
Kal ojvo/JLa^ov. 

GEO. Ta irola 8rj ; 

212. ^oc^LO-TrjV, 7ToXltik6v, (fiiAoaocpov. 

GEO. TV 8e fxaXiara kou to ttolov tl ire pi amwv 
8iaiTopi]6eh epeaOai SievoyOrjs ; k 



here partly suggested by tov 
firjdevos, which hardly needs 
illustration. 

1. tots pev — Tore Se] Bodl. 
p. m. Tore fiev — tote Se. 

ttoXitikol] E. g. Epiinenides, 
Solon, Pythagoras. 

2. cro^ia-Tai] As Socrates in 
the 'Clouds,'or Plato at Syracuse. 
The word is used here with- 
out any invidious association, 
like ttoXitikol, merely denoting a 
recognized class. The variation 
of language in rifuoi — agtoi is 
in keeping with the studied 
refinement of this dialogue. 

3. TravTCLTTacnv e\ovres [wviicas] 
Cf. Phsedr. 249 c, d : lb. e : al- 

Tiav e'xei a>s pavLKms bLaKeipevos : 

and the words of Alcibiades 
in the Symposium 218 b : 

navres yap KeKoivoivrjKaTe rrjs (pi- 
Xoaofpov pavlas re ko.1 ^aK^fias. 

Note the emphatic position of 

fiaviKws. 

4. tov pevroi £evov~\ The double 
fitvTot marks a double transi- 
tion : from the person of the 
Stranger to the nature of philo- 
sophers, and from this to the 
Stranger again,who is addressed 
with an inquiry bearing on the 



subject which has been thus sug- 
gested. " The philosopher is apt 
tobe confounded with the States- 
man and Sophist, except when 
he is looked upon as mad. Will 
the Stranger clear the confusion 
by defining each of the terms 
in question ?" 

tj/jllv gives a courteous turn 
to *fche expression, like poi 
after a vocative. 

et (piXov avra] Cf. Theset. 
162b: dXX' el ovrcos, a> Qe68cope, 
<ro\ (piXov, ovS" ep-ol ex_6pov. infr. 
222 b. 

5. tl ravd* — a>v6pa£ov~] "What 

his countrymen (in Magna 
Grascia) thought of these mat- 
ters, and how they used to 
apply the terms." The imper- 
fect implies the qualification 
"When he was amongst them." 
For the adverbial ti, cf. Phsedr. 

234 C : tl vol (paiverai 6 \6yos " 
9. Ti 8e pa\io~ra — Sieporjdrjs] 
The curious formality of this 
address belongs to Plato's later 
style. (See General Introd.) Cf. 

infr. 226 b : to tto'lov avTav nepL 
ISov^Tjdels Sf/Xcocrcu, irapa.8eiypa.Ta 
■rrpodus TavTa Kara ttcivtcov ijpov ) 

24O C : TTfj KOA TO 7TOtoV TL (fiofiov- 



niiw rv^ 

Statesman, 
now aa 
• Sophist,' 
despised, 
believed in, 
wondered 
at as mad. 



Sophist, 

Statesman, 
Philoso- 
pher : — 
What lias 
our Italian 
friend to 
tell us of 
these 
things ? 



8 



IIAATQN02 



l>o his 
conntry- 
men ac- 
count them 
one, or two, 
or three '" 



Tlie Stran- 
ger had 
been al- 
ready asked 
this ques- 
tion on the 
way. 
He will 
shew that 
each of the 
three terms 
denotes a 
different 
nature, 
though to 
distinguish 
them is by 
no means 
a simple 
task. 



213. T68e' TTOTtpQV €V iraVTOL TOLVTO. ev6pi(j)V l) \>-2\J. 

860, i] KaOairep tu ouofiara rpla, rpla kou yevrj 8ua- 
povpevoi Kaff ev ovopta yevos eKaarco irpoo-rjTrTOV ; 

GEO. 'AAA' ov8el?, cos eyco/xai, ([jOovo? avrco 8teX- 
5 0eiv aura. ' H 7TC09, co £eVe, Xeycopiev; 

SE. Our cos", co Qe68cope. (pOovos p.ev yap ov8el?, b 
ov8e )(aXe7rov elwelv on ye rp'C rjyovvTO' Kaff eKacrrov 
pcr/v SLopLcraaOai cra(J)co?, t'l ttot ecmv, ov ap.iK.pov ov8e 
pa8iov epyov. 
'o 0EO. Kal p.ev 8rj Kara rvyj]v ye, co ^coKpares, 
Xoycov e7reXa(3ov 7rapairXr](Ticov cov Kal irp\v rjpa? 
8evp eXOelv 8iepcoTcovre? avrov eTvyya.vop.ev. 6 8e 
ramd, airep 7rpo? ere vvv, koll tote iaKrj7rr€TO irpos 
rj peas' eire\ 8iaKr)Koevat, ye <§>r\cnv 'iKavcos Kal ovk 
isapLvqpovelv. 

20. Mt) tolvvv, co tjeve, rjfxcov tt)v ye 7rpcorr)v c 



pevos ovra> XeyeLS ) Legg. 6,752b: 

Ttepi TL (SXiTTCdV Kai 7Toi paXlCTTa 
avrb e'lpr/Kas ra vvv; lb. 4, 705 cl : 
els 8r] tl TG>v elpr/pevcov jSke\jras, 

emes o Xe'yeis ; "In regard to 
what point, and with a view to 
what difficulty respecting these 
things, did the question occur 
to you?" 

2. rpLa Kaiyevrj] The Bodleian 
MS., as well as Alii, has Ka\ yevrj, 
which is manifestly right, to 
yevrj does not suit with Siaipov- 

pevoi. They do not divide the 
classes, but distinguish three. 
" Did they, as the names are 
three, distinguish also three 
kinds, and assign one severally 
to each name 1 ?" 

6. (pdovos — elnelp] (fidovos IS 

not to be joined with ehreiv. 
" You are right, Theodorus ; I 
have no wish to withhold any- 



thing." 

7. rpi' r)yovvTO~\ So Bodl. 

1 1 . \6yoav — hv $iepa>TU>vTes~] For 

the apposition of the clause to 
the relative, cf. Theaet. 158 b : 
to Toiovfte dp(pio-l3fjTJ]pa, — 6 ttoX- 
Aa/as <re oipai aKr/Koevai epwTvv- 

tcov. Compare Tim. 20 d : koL 
en irpoTepov Kad' 6B6v av Tavra 
eo~K(movp.ev. . 

TrapaTrXrjo-Lcvv a>v\ As Trapa- 

nXrjo-ms is rarely found with the 
genitive, there is probably here 
a double attraction : i. e. hv = 

ols = TOVTOtS ovs. 

12. 6 8e TavTa] Heindorf's 
slight emendation (ravTa for 
TavTa) seems to be required by 
the antithesis npos ere vvv — totc 

npos rjpas. 

16. Mr) — yevrj] " Be not so 
cruel as to refuse our first boon 
when we have asked it of you." 



20<M2TH2. 9 

p. 217. airrjcrdpTcoi/ yaptv airapvrj9ei<i yivr\. ToaovSe <5' -qp.lv 
(/)pa(e' irorepov elooOas i]8lov avTOS 67n (tolvtov 
paKpaj Xoycp diefJLevcu Xe'ycov touto, b av ev8el^aa- 
6ai tco fiovXrjOrj?, rj 81 epcorrjcrecov, oiov wore kcll 
llappevl8r) xpcojjL€i>w koll 8le^iovtl Xoyovs irayKaXovs 5 
Trapeyevofxrjv eyco veos cov, €K€lvov paXa 8ij totc 
ovtos 7rp€a(3vTov ; 

HE. Tw pep, co "EcoKpare?, olXvttco? re koll evrjvlco? 



The use of the auxiliary verb 
(see Gen. In trod.) is a feature 
of Plato's later style : and is 
one of the points in which that 
style approximates to the lan- 
guage of tragedy. 

2. (tcoBas rj§iov~\ " Do you 
commonly prefer 1 ?" 

3. (laKpcp \6yco 8te{;iei>ai Xeywj/] 

There is a slight emphasis on 
Ae'ywj/. " Do you prefer to en- 
large in an extended speech on 
the subject which you desire 
to explain, or to discuss the 
matter (8u£ievai) by means of 
questions, a practice Avhich I 
remember that Parmenides 
used — ?" 

4. oiov ^pco/ieVw] oiov is 

cognate or adverbial accus., 
like tl — rjyoiivTo above. Com- 
pare Theset. 170 b: 7-1 — XPV- 
aofieda tw Aoyw, and Lys. 213c: 
t'i ovv 8rj xpTjo-wfxeda, where 
there is an ellipse of the da- 
tive, 7U Xoyw or to"ls Xoyoiy, as 
here. It seems probable that 
the Parmenides had been com- 
posed, or at least planned, when 
this passage and Theret. 184 a 
were written. 

8. To} — aXvnas re Kai evr)- 
viu>s 7rpo(r5iaXsyojiteVw] " With a 

respondent who gives no trou- 
ble and is guided easily." It 



must be acknowledged that 
most of the respondents in 
Plato's dialectical dialogues 
have this virtue. They an- 
swer in the spirit of the ques- 
tioner, and accept true reason- 
ing when it is placed before 
them. When a sally is per- 
mitted them, this is obviously 
done either for the sake of 
relieving the gravity of the 
argument, or in order that 
they may derive instruction 
from their own mistakes, or 
thirdly, in one or two rare 
cases, that they may shew that 
the highest truths are some- 
times the intuitions of the 
simple mind. Docility in the 
pupil as well as the mens 
divinior in the teacher is re- 
quired for the purposes of dia- 
lectic. This is less obviously 
the case in the Republic and 
Phsedo, where Glaucon and 
Adimautus, Simmias and Cebes, 
are allowed to propound their 
difficulties, thus exhibiting an- 
other aspect of the philosophic 
spirit. Yet Glaucon claims the 
merit of being a more facile 
respondent than some others 
would be. Rep. 5, 474 a : ta-cas 

av aWov rov f/x/ieXfcrrepni/ dno- 
Kpivotfxrjv. Cf. Legg. 7, 797 d. It 



1 1 e choo < 
to pro© 1 d 

li_\ qui =- 

tions, a 1 
Parmeni- 
des used, 
and accepts 

Theietetus 
for his re- 
spondent : 
who, when 
tired, will 
be relieved 
by Socra- 
tes the 
younger. 



10 



OAATONOS 



TrpouSiaAeyofitvcD pa.ov ovtu), to irpo? aAkov 
/,(?/, to Kaff amov. 

2i7. ' EijeaTi Tolvvv twv TrapovTwv ov av fiovAijOrjv 
eKAetjao-@a.r TrdvTts yap viraKOvaovTai aoi 7rpaco<>. 
< crvpifiovAcp p.i)v ip.ol xpcopevo? tcov vecov tlvol aiprjo-ei, 
QeamjTov TOv8e, i] kol tcov aAAcov ei riy croi kutu 
vovv. 

SE. 'O Sco/cpares", aidco? t'ls p! e^ei to vvv npcoTov 
crvyyev6p.€vov v/uv prj Kara crpuKpov eiros irpos 67T09 



d de p. 2 i 

(I 



is curious to observe that the 
Heracliteims of Ephesus (Theret. 
1 80) aud the extreme mate- 
rialists (Soph. 246) are de- 
spaired of in this respect as 
being incapable of dialectic, rod 

dovvai kci\ de^ao-dai Xoyoj/. For 
the use of npos in irpooSiake- 
yopeva, compare Theaet. 162 b, 
irpoo-nakauiv; ib. 169 C, ivpoo-ava- 
Tpiy^dpevos ; and for inraKOvcrov- 

rai TTpdas, paullo infra, cf. Theset. 
162 a ". pah' eppeXas o~oi i(paLv€TO 
vTraKoveiv. The community of 
spirit between those convers- 
ing is also dwelt on in Ph?ed. 
58 d : Kai p,rjv, w ^aidcov, Ka\ rovs 
aKovaopevovs ye toiovtovs aWovs 
e'xeis. The adj. evrjvios occurs 
with the ethical meaning = 
obedient, tractable, Legg. 5, 
730 b, 9, 880 a. 

I. to npos ciXXov — to Kad' 
qvtov] Sc. 8ie£ievai tovs Xoyovs. 

4. TTpaas = ov 8vo~peva>s oi8e 

paxrjTiKu?, Theset. 168 b. 

5. tu>v vecov tivo] As being 
free from prepossessions and 
more supple to follow the wind- 
ings of an argument, cf. Parm. 

137 b : 6 vemTdTOs ; ^/ciara yap 
av TTchvirpaypovol, Ka\ a o'lerai 



fiaXiaT av aivoKpLvoiTo. Theait. 
162 b : prj (\k(lv irpos to yvpvd- 
o-iov o-KXrjpov rjSrj ovra, rw 8e 8tj 
veoiTepai nal vyporepa ovti Trpoana- 
Xaieiv. Ib. 146 b. 

8. atScbj tls p f'x et ] "•" s01 't °f 

modesty comes over me at the 
thought of continuing our in- 
terview not colloquially but by 
spinning a lengthened mono- 
logue by myself, or even ad- 
dressing myself to another at 
length, which would only be a 
kind of display. For the truth 
is, that the word you have 
now given us is not of such 
easy compass as one might ex- 
pect on hearing the question, 
but requires an immense 
amount of discussion." 

to vvv'] The Vatican MS. (A) 
and the Bodleian a and Venetian 
(n) first hand have preserved a 
reading tov vovv, which is partly 
due to the preceding vovv, and 
partly to the intelligibleness of 
the phrase al8d>s p exei tov vovv. 
But irpwTov could have no mean- 
ing without vvv, and the article 
is required to mark the limita- 
tion of the preceding clause. 

9. ems ivpbs eTros] Cf. Ari- 



The Bodleian has tui 



with the omicron erased. 



p. 21 7. TTOiHaOou Tt]v avvovalav, dXX eKTelvavTa a.7rop(.i]KV- 
c veiv Xoyov o~v)(vov kclt e/xavTov, eire kou irpos tTepov, 
oiov tiridei^LV TTOiovfievov' tco yap ovtl to vvv pi-jOlv 
ov% oaov coSe tpcoTrjOev eXTrlaeiev av ai)TO eivai tls; 
aXXa Tvyyavei Xoyov TrapiprjKOvs ov. to 8e av aoi 5 
per) ^apl^eaOai kou TolaSe, aXXco? re kou aov Xe'tjavTos 
coy elire?, a^evov tl KaTa^alveTai p.ot kou aypiov. eireX 

p. 218. QeaiTrjTov ye tov it poaScaXeyopievov eivai 8e\opat 
iravTonraaiv eij wv amos re rrpoTepov 8t.elXeypL.ai kou 
av to. vvv p.01 SiaKeXevei. 10 



2CKM2TH2. 



11 



stopll. Nub. 1379 : ndvTevdev pev, 
olov eUos, eiros np6s enos rjpeido- 
peada. And for the construc- 
tion, see note on Thefet. 193 d: 

Se£ta els dpicrrepa perappeov- 

CTTjS. 

1. eKTelvavra — <tvxvov~] Cf. 
Prot. 329 a, b : coairep to. x a ^-~ 
K(7a irXijyevTa paupbv foei Kal 
dnoTelvei — Kal oi py'jropes ovtco 
boXi\bv KaraTeivovcri tov Xoyov. 
The whole passage should be 
compared, also ib. 335 a, and 
infr. 268 b. eKTelvavra dTTopr r 
Kvvetv is probably a metaphor 
taken from the act of drawing- 
out a thread in spinning, " to 
spin off a long yarn by my- 
self." 

2 . et're — iroiovpevov] As in 
the conversation of Protagoras 
with Socrates and Hippocrates 
in Prot. 316-318. On the 
other hand, the mythe and ar- 
gument of Protagoras, pp. 320- 
328, are not addressed to any 
one in particular, and might 
be said to be uttered either els 

to pecrov or Kad' eavTov. 

4. o&x oaov code epcorrjdev (fiai- 
verai] Cf. Theeet. 1 47 d : 'Padiov, 
go ScoKpares, vvv ye ovtco (palveraC 



drap KLvbvveveis epcordv olov k.t.X. 

For the participle, cf. Phileb. 
14 c: ev — to. TroXXa eivai Kal to 
ev iroXXa QavpaaTov Xe%8ev. 

5. Xoyov TrapprjKovs ov] " Re- 
quiring a lengthened argu- 
ment." Cf. Eep. 3, 414 c: nelaai 
de av\vr)s ireidovs. Legg. 5, 730 : 
noXXrjs evXafteias. 

6. aov Xe^avTos cos elires] i. e. 

so courteously — referring chief- 
ly to the opening words of 
Socrates. Note the studied 
variation of XegavTos — etires. 

7. cigevcv] " Uncivil ;" in- 
consistent with the courtesy 
due to strangers. Cf. Eur. Fr. 
ap. Stob. Fl. 126, 6: 'Aw)/j 

tjevoiaiv ci^evos. 

KaracpuiveTai] A strength- 
ened, perhaps chiefly poetical, 
form of cpaiverai = " appears dis- 
tinctly." Cf. Horn. H. Ap.431, 

and compare Kadopav, KaTidelv, 

KClTdKOlKLV. 

eirei] " It were yngi'acious : 
for I can make no objection to 
the respondent whom you offer 
to me." Theaetetus had joined 
in the conversation between 
the Stranger and Theodorus on 
the way. 



C 2, 



12 



IIAAT12N02 



OEAI. ' ApOLTOlVVV, CO tjeVC, OVTCO KOU, KaOdlTtp eiTVe ]> 

^coKparys, iraai KeyapiaLievos e<rei ; 

SE. KtvSvvevei 717509 p.ev ram a ov8ev eri XeKTeou 

eivai, Qealrrjre' irpo9 8e ire ijSrj to ixera tovto, cos* 

5€0iK€ } ylyvovr av 6 Xoyo?. av f)' apa tl tw lli)kcl 

ttovcov ct)(6r], fiii ifxe alriaaOai tovtcov, aAAa rovade 

tov? crov? eralpovs. 

0EAI. 'AAA' oi/jLai p.ev 8r) vvv ovtcos ovk tarepelv' 1> 
av 8' apa tl tolovtov ylyvrjrai, /cat rov8e 7rapaAr)\\ro- 
o jieOa ^coKparrj, rbv "ScoKparov? ptev optcovvpLOV, efxbv 
Se i]Xlklcoti]v koll avyyvp.vaaTi]v, cp Gwoiairovelv iier 
epLOv ra iroWa ovk wqOes. 

HE. Ei) Ae'yei?, kol ram a p.ev 18 la ftovAevaei 

agreed as TTpOlOVTOS TOV AOyOV' KOLVYj Oe p.eT epLOV CTOL CTVCT- 

to the name 



18. 



I. 

We are 



I. ? Apa rolvvv — etret ;] "Will 
you then in this (in select- 
ing me) be doing also what 
Socrates desired — ministering 
to the gratification of all pre- 
sent 1 " Ka\ is separated from 
Traa-L /ce^. e<rei by the insertion 
of the clause Kaddrrep (lire 2co- 
Kpdrrjs. So infr. p. 241 c: Ka\, 
Kaddnep vvv «Vey, dyaTTTjo-eLi ; 
Tim. 20 C : ml pev S17, Kaddnep 
fine Tipaios 6'Se, k.t.A. Thea?t. 
2IO b : Kai, vai pa. At" e'ycoye, 
7rXet'co k.t.X. eiVe 2. refers to rjpmv 
— aiTTj(rdvTa>v x^P iv j m which 
words Socrates had included 
all present. 

3. KivSvvevei — eraipovs] A 
murmur of assent from the by- 
standers must be supposed to 
follow Thesetetus' words. 

5. rco prjKei TTovav] Stallbaum, 
in his note, has substituted 
ttovcov for 7rova>v, but the par- 
ticiple is obviously right. For 



the dative, cf. Soph. Track 
681 : ttovcov TrXevpav iriKpa yha- 

6. fit/ ifie curiao-dai] Bodl.Vat. 
Ven. n. p.e. The infinitive is 
a softened imperative, cf. Rep. 
5, 473 a; infr. 262 e: av pot 

<ppd£eiv. 

9. iav Se — 2<i>KpdTrf\ So Pro- 

tarchus relieves Philebus, when 
tired. Phileb. 1 1 c : dvdyKt) 

bix^o-dai, <J>i'X?y/3oj yap r)p1v 6 
KaXos aTreiprjKev. 

i 2. ra 7roXXa is better taken 
as cognate accusative after 
o-wbiaTToveiv than as adverbial to 
ovx. drjOes. " Who is well used 
in most thiugs to share labours 
with me." Young Socrates ap- 
pears in the Theagtetus as a 
mute personage, and shares 
the credit of the geometrico- 
arithmetical definition of the 
irrational roots. Theret. 147, 
148. 



2CXM2THZ. 



18 



21 8. K€7TT€0U ap^OfieVCO TTpCOTOl/, COS" €fJLOL (pCUl/€Tai, VVV OTTO 
", (j-jTOVVTL KCU t\ltyavi(pVTl AoyO) TL 7TOT 



TOV CTOCpiCTTOV, 

ear 1. vvv 



yap 81] av [re] Kayco tovtov irepi Tovvo/xa 
/jlovov e'xp/jiev KOtvrj' to 8e epyov, i(f> co KaAodfiev, 



1. vvv, which is opposed 
to Trpo'iovros r. X., and would 
be joined most naturally with 
arvo-nenTeov, appears to be dis- 
placed by a conversational 
hyperbaton, perhaps to avoid 
the hiatus cpalverai — ano, per- 
haps drawn by a sort of at- 
traction to the words which 
indicate the immediate subject 
of discourse, vvv is again dis- 
placed, apparently for euphony, 
infr. 221 c, 231 b; cf. also 
Legg. 1, 627 b : to d' ino o~ov 
Xeyopevov fj.avda.va> vvv. 

2. efi<pavi£ovTi Xoyw] " Mak- 
ing clear by argument." Dia- 
lectic is at once a process of 
discovery and of proof, ipcpavl- 
(ovrt of course agrees with 0-01 
and not with I/mm, as Ast seems, 
by some strange oversight, to 
have supposed. Xdya> is slightly 
emphatic, and is referred to in 
what immediately follows. ovo- 
pa = the name, is distinguished 
on the one hand from epyov 
or irpayiia, the thing, and on 
the other from \6yos, the de- 
finition or true conception of 
the thing. For the former, cf. 

Cratyl. 413 e : avTO prjvvei to 
epyov to ovopa fj avpela, and for 

the latter, Theset. 202, which 
is closely related to the pre- 
sent passage. The conception 
of \6yos is the same in this 
place as in the conclusion of 
the Thea?tetus, viz. definition 
through division or the ex- 
pression of the characteristic 
difference, epyov and Xdyo? are 



here correlative, and not op- 
posed, as in the common anti- 
thesis epya> ov Xo'yw. The union 
01 both, to irpaypa avTo 81a \6ya>v, 

is opposed to the mere name, 

to b'popa povov X^P^ Xdyou. The 

variation of epyov and irpaypa is 
perhaps due to the same re- 
finement to which that of cpi,- 
\ov and yevos is owing. But 
epyov is rather the Sophist's 
function, irpaypa simply the 
thing meant by the word. Cf. 
also Legg. 9, 864 b : rjplv fie 

OVK eCTTl TO. vvv ovopuTcov nepi 
ovo-epis Xdyoy. lb. I o, 895 d : 

9 > > * >/|/x \ t 1 

ap ovk av eueAois rrepi eKao~Tov 

Tpia voelv, ev pev ttjv ovalav, ev 

fie ttjs cvaias tov \6yov, ev fie to 
ovopa k.t.X. lb. 12, 964 a: ovco- 
irapev tov eifidra iKavas irep\ usvtl- 
vcovovv, ois eo-TL pev ovopa, eari o' 
av Ka\ Xdyos, iroTepov povov eirlara- 
o-Qai Tovvopa xpeav *] tov ye ovTa 
tl Ka\ irep\ tcjv 8ia(pep6vTccv peyedei 
Ka\ KaXXei iravTa to. ToiavTa ayvo- 
elv alo~xpov. (pv~kov, tribe, is a 
more poetical, because a newer, 
metaphor, for the idea of Sort 
or Kind than yevos, race or 
family. The search for the 
Sophist is spoken of as a 
branch of natural history. For 
to ovopa — crvvcopoXoyrjaao-dai, cf. 
Theset. 164 c : Trpds Tas t£>v 
ovopaTcov SpoXoyias 6po\oyr]o~d- 
pevoi. 

3. av [re] Kaya>] The Bodleian 
MS. gives o-v nay io with the 
rest, except Flor. i. 

4. e(p' co KaXovpev] Sc. to 
ovopa. 



"Sophia*." 
our objeci 
ia bo defin< 
tin; thing, 
and so to 
bring to 
light the 
conception 



U 



1IAATQNQ2 



which, it 

may be, we 

llHVt: si'Vc- 

rally within 
our minds. 

Great sub- 
jects, it has 
long been 
felt,' should 
be ap- 
proached 
through 
easy exam- 
ples. And, 
as the So- 
phist is a 
creature 
difficult to 



eKUTepo? rax av iota Trap yptv avTOLg €\oip.eV fiei \>. z\H. 
Se del ttolvtos irept to irpdypa avTo ptaXXov did 
Xoycov rj tovvo/jlci povov crvvopoXoyrjo~ao~0ai \cop19 
Xoyov. to 8e (pvXov, o vvv eirtvoovpev (jjTe'iv, ov 

5 TTaVTCOV paCTTOP CTvXXafiuv Tl TTOT €0~TIV, 6 aOffjLO-TT}?. 

baa 8" av tcov peyaXcov Set hiairoveiaOat KaXtos, irept 
tcov tolovtcov Se'SoKTai irdat kcu irdXai to irpoTepov 
ep crpLiKpois Ka\ paoaiv am a 8etv p.e\eTav, irptv iv <\ 
avTois rots peyicrTois. vvv ovv, cb QeaLTrjTe, eycoye 
io/cat vcov ovtco avp(3ovXevco, ^aAe7ro^ kol SvaOrjpevTOV 



4. to Be (pvXop — 6B6p] " Now 
the Sophist tribe, which we are at 
present minded to examine, is of 
a nature which is not the easiest 
in the world to comprehend. 
Again, when a great subject is 
to be adequately handled, it 
has long since been the ap- 
proved course in such a case 
to try one's hand upon the 
question in trivial and easy 
instances, before attempting 
it in the great matter which 
has been undertaken. On 
the present occasion there- 
fore, Theaetetus, I would re- 
commend that you and I, con- 
sidering the Sophist to be of a 
kind which is difficult to cap- 
ture and to chase, should try 
our prentice hand on some 
easier quarry, and make this a 
preparatory study of the way 
to find him, unless you have 
at your command some more 
feasible proposal." Perhaps in 
ttjp fxidoBop avrov there is an 
allusion to the literal mean- 
ing of fieTiepai, ' to pursue.' Cf. 
infr. 235 d. 

ov TraPTcup paorop] Cf. inf. 
244 c. In Eep. 6, 497 d, ov 



iravras pqenop 8ie\8elp, ttuptodp 
should probably be read. 

7. Kal 7rdXai] " Even from of 
old." Not only now but long 
ago. Cf. Thea?t. 202 d : kcu 
7roXXot. 

to — Belp] The article marks 
the infinitive as the subject of 
the verb. 7repi tS>p tolovtcop may 
be construed with BsBoktuc, but 
belongs rather to the whole 
sentence. "In dealing with such 
subjects it has long been the 
general opinion that one should 
first exercise inquiry on lesser 
and easier topics." avTa is vague, 
resuming to>p toiovtwp, but in a 
more general sense = the inquiry 
or the method of procedure. 

I O. ^aXenop — npopikeTqp] These 
words are in apposition to ovtco 

after o~vp.[3ov\eva>. xakewop = 

"troublesome." As if he were 
some animal we were trying to 
lay hold of. Cf. Polit. 273b: 80-a 

XaXeTra tus <fivo~€is \8C.Tc0v 6r)picop), 
and Eep. 6, 493 b : ottot^ x a ^ e ~ 

TTCOTCITOP KOI TTpdOTdTOP KOI (K tLpCCP 

yiypeTai. The metaphor, which 
appears very slightly in to <pv- 
Xop — o-vWapelv, is more dis- 
tinctly present here, and in 



20M2TH2. 



15 



ip. 2] 8. yyrjaapevoLs elvai to tov aocjjiaTov yevos wporepov tv catch, it is 
aAXcp paovi ti]v pWodov glvtov irpopeXeTav, d fir) av t. 

TTO06V €VTreT6(TT€pai> €)(€L? €L7TeLV 6lXXt]V 6SoV- with him. 

0EAI. 'AAA' ovk ex&). 

HE. BofAef Sijra ivepi tlvos tcov obavXwv pceriovTes 5 
7reipa&cop.€V Trapadeiypa avro OeaOaL tov /W(Wo9 ; 
e 0EAI. Not. 

3?E. Tfc ^ra 7rpoTatjaLpi€0' av evyvcoaTov pev Let the 

v / x / *v » v >. / ,/ „ angler be 

/cat apLKpov, Xoyov oe p-yoevo? eXarrova e^ov tcov our ex- 

yi t > / 9 ' ' " / / ample, in 

peiCpvcov ; Oio*/ acnraXievT-qs' ap ov iracn re yi/co- 10 which to 

v ^~j/ \ \ ~ \ j /s. practise the 

/)£/UOI> Kdl <JTTOVOr]S OV TTO.VV TL 7TOXXrj? TLVOS eiTa^LOV ; method of 

0EAI. OShws. definition " 

p. 219. HE. Me'#oSof yu?)y avTov iXiri^co kcli Xoyov ovk 
dv€7TLTr}8eLov rjpuv €)(eiv 7rpos* o /3ovXop.e0a. 

0EAI. KaXcos av e'xoi. i 5 



the word 8vo-6fjpevrov, which is 
partly suggested by x a ^ e7T0V 
and partly by ov pddiov o-vXXa- 
pelv, the image of the chase, 
which is continued afterwards, 
is fully brought out. 

2. ttjv pedobov clvtov TTpo/xeXe- 
Tav\ " To practise beforehand 
the method, which is proper 
to be applied to him." For the 
genitive avrov, see below : \xi6o- 
dov jir/v avrov £Km£w — ^X elVt 

For iroSev, cf. Polit. 257 d : 
Kivhweverov ap.<fia> TToBev epol crvy- 
yevetav e'xeiv rivd. 

5. /xeriwres] Used absolutely, 
as in Protag. 350 d : el ovra p,e- 
Tiav epoio p,e. It is natural that 
words like p-enevac and xpw® ai 
(supr. 217 c), which recur often 
with the same object (\6yos), 
should sometimes be used 
alone. 

6. 7rapd8eiypa Oeivai] Cf. Polit. 



277 c sqq., where the nature 
of such examples is explained. 
The "large letters" of the Ee- 
public afford an apparent in- 
stance of the converse method. 
But in each case the inquiry 
advances from the less known 
to the more known. 

8. 7rpo7-a|ai/xe^' av] Sc. {JlTeiv 
or periivai. 

10. oiov acmaXuvTris] The con- 
struction is absolute. Cf.Theset. 

178 C : oiov 6epp.d ; dpa k.t.A. 
Euthyd. 302 a : olov @ovs nai 
Trpopara, dpa k.t.X. alib. 

11. 011 irdvv tl 77oX\rjs rivos] 

" Worth no very great amount 
of interest." 

15. KaXcos ni» e^oj] " That is 
well." The expression is slightly 
hypothetical. Thesetetus takes 
the Stranger's word for what 
he himself does not clearly 
see. 



Ui 



1IAAT12N02; 



He is an 
artist, and 
there are 
two kinds 

of art : 



HE. <be'pe <5//, Tij8e dp)(co/ie0a auruv. Kai /wi Xeye' p. -Hy 

TTOTtpOV G)$ TeytVLTTjV ttVTOV t) TLVO. <ZT€)(VOV, CiKXrjV 8t 

Svvafuv eyovTa, Orjaopev ; 

0EAI. 'H/acrra ye areyyov. 
5 HE. 'AAAa fxyu twv ye Teyycov Traacov aye&bv 
e\Si] Svo. 

0EAI. n^; 

HE. Tecopyia \xev kcli bar) irep\ to Ovtjtov ttolv 
crcopa Oepcnrela, to t€ av irepl to ^vvOeTOV kou 
io7r\ao-Tou, o 8r) avceuo? (ovopaKa/iev, i) re /JLiprjTiK^, b 
^vpiravTa Tama SiKaioTaT av ev\ tt poaay opevoiT av 

OVOpLOTl. 

0EAI. Tlcos kou tivl; 

HE. Hav birep av fir) irpbrepov tls bv vaTepov eh 



i. airov is probably neuter. 

Cf. Rep. 2, 369 b : ei yiy vopevrjv 
tioKlv 6eao-aipeda Aoy<a — ovkovv 
yevopevov aiirov. 

2. (irexvov, ciXhrjv 6e ovvapiv 

e'xovTa] For the qualifying- 
clause with §e, compare Polit. 

277 C ' tols 8' aXkoLs 81a %ei- 

povpyiav, et passim ; and for 
the etymological use of a.Ttx vov -> 
cf. Theset. 168 a: ami — (piXoa-o- 
cpav pio-ovvras tovto to irpaypa. 
Legg. 7; 8 TO a: (pi\oo-o<frovvTa 
pr]8e picrovvTa. lb. 10, 886 c : 
Oioyoviav — yevopevoi re u>s Trpbs 
akXrjkovs 6)pihrjo~av. 

4. "Hklo-to. ye] ye, though 

omitted by the Bodleian MS., 
with All, is probably right, and 
expresses assent to the meaning 
of the question. 

8. nav aapa] " All," col- 
lectively, as in Ar. Eth. Nic. 

I. 13. § 7 '• o(fi6a\p6v Kai ttclv 
(Tcbpa. For (TKiVOS = $-vv8(Tov 

Kai ivkao-Tov, cf. Hep. 2, 38 1 a : 



Kai pijv Kai to. ye i^vvdera 
■navTa, aKevr] re Kai olKodoprjpara 

Kai dpcpieo-paTa. o-Kevos here de- 
notes what is manufactured, 
(compounded or moulded,) as 
distinguished from organized 
bodies; cf. Eep. 10, 596 d. 
a<bpa acquires a still more 
general meaning in Phileb. 29 
d, infr. 246 a. 

1 1 . SiKaiorar av eVt] The Bod- 
leian, with a corrector of the 
Coislinian MS., gives pi> twice 
over, after 8iKai6rara and -npoa- 

ayopevoiro. 

1 4. Uav oTrep] " In the case of 
everything, which — ." The ac- 
cusative is placed, as if abso- 
lutely, at the beginning of the 
sentence, and is rather governed 
by cpapev than by Syovra. Cf. 

Polit. 295 d : TTCLV TO TOIOVTOV £vp- 

Paivov, where the accusative is 
absolute. And infr. t6 — padrjpa- 
tik6v — et'Sos. For the meaning, cf. 
Theset. 155 b : o pi) npoTepov fy, 



SOM2TH2. 



17 



iy. ovaiav ayy, rov \xev ayovru iroLelv, to 8e ayo\xevov 
TTOieiaOai irov (j)afui>. 

6EAI. 'OpOm. 

HE. Ta 8e ye vvv 8rj [a] 8ir']A0opev airavTa ei^ev 
els tovto tx]v olvtcdv 8vvat±iv. 5 

0EAI. Ei'xe yap ovv. 

HE. Y]oli]tiki)v tolvvv aura avyKe(PaAaicoadfxevoL 
TrpoaeLTTCojiev. 
c 0EAI. "Eo-rco. 

SE. To 5?) pLaOrjfAaTiKov av fierce tovto elSo? oAov io 
/cat ro r?79 yvcopiaecos to re ^pi]/xaTiaTLKov koll ay to- 



ol 



uXXu varepov tovto elvai livev tov 
yevea6ai Kai yiyue(T0cu cibvvaTov ; 
Symp. 205 b : »/ yap rot eV tov 
firi ovtos els to bv Iovti 6t(oovv 
atria ndo-d iort Trolqais. Pro- 
duction is more fully desci'ibed 
in Legg. 10, 894 a: ylyverat 

5/) ndvrcov yeveo-is, rjviK av ri nddos 
f] \ 8r]Kov cos oiiQTav dp^rj \a(3ovo~a 
av£r]v els ttjv 8evTepav e\8{] /xerd- 
(3ao-iv, koX dnb ravrr^s els ti)v ttAt/- 
o~lov, kcli pexP 1 T p l <<> v eXdovcra 
aladrjo-iv o~XJ] Tols alo-davofievots. 

4. Ta Se ye vvv 8r) [a] 8ltj\6o- 
/xei'] " But those things which 
we just now enumerated." a is 
omitted in the Bodleian and 
seven other MSS. The reading 

a 8e ye vvv 8rj 8ir)\6ou.ev, which is 

adopted by the Zurich editors, 
is due to a corrector of the 
Coislinian MS. But the read- 
ing in the text is preferable 
as being less obvious ; and the 
inversion (vvv 81) d for a vvv S17) 
is in the manner of these dia- 
logues. (The old edd. had vvv 
a 8>} with B E F.) 

For Td — a, cf. Rep. 8, 585 b : 

to 0101/ a irov re (cat ttotov ku\ b\j/ov. 
10. To 81] — Tvptnci yap «i>] 



" Well, if we take next to this 
the whole department of learn- 
ing and of acquiring know- 
ledge, with those of money- 
making, contention and pursuit, 
since none of these produces, 
but they are engaged either in 
conquering, or in preventing 
men from conquering, that 
which already exists and has 
been produced, — on account 
of all these sections, it will ap- 
pear most suitable to use the 
term ' acquisitive art.' " "It 
will indeed wear an appro- 
priate look." Observe that no 
attempt is made to look for the 
Sophist either in the padrjp.aTi- 

kov or yvcopio'TiKov el8os tu>v Te%- 
vav. The construction of the 
sentence is not determined from 
the beginning, but the accusa- 
tives (which are resumed in 
TavTa i-vvdiravTa to. p-eprj) simply 

follow the analogy of ttoitjtlktjv 

— axiTa. 

p.adr]u.aTiKbv] So the Bod- 
leian MS. Here, as in Ar. Met. 
I. 1, the MSS. vary between 

u-aBquaT. and p.a6rjT. 



IS 



FIAATQNOS 



Ami an art 

of getting. 



The an- 
gler's is an 
art of get- 
ting. 



vicniKov koli OijpevriKov, — iirevbrj Siyuovpyu. pclv uvoev p. 219. 
tovtcov, ra 8e ovra koll yeyovora r« fitv yeipovrou 
Aoyoi? koll Trpaijeai, tu 8e toi? yeipovixevois ovk 
t7riTp€7r€i, — \mkicrT av nov 81a. ravra ^vvairavra ra 
5 fiepy rtyyr) ris KTr/riKi] XeyOeiaa av Stair ptyeiev. 

GEAI. Ngu' irpliroi yap av. 

£?E. KrrjriKrj? 81] Ka\ 7roirjTiKr]<; ^v/nraacov ovacov d 
rcov reyycov eV rrorepa rrjv aairaXievTiK-qv, co Qeal- 
rrjre, ridco/iev; 

° GEAI. 'Ei> KTYjTLKfl 7T0V 8rjAoV. 



2. ra pev xeipovrai Xoyots] Cf. 
Eutliyd. 290 b, where geometers 
&c.are classed amongst 8-qpevrai. 

4. eTTiTpsTre 1] SC. X.eipoiHT0aiavrd. 
fiaKuTT av ttov — 8itt7rpe\|/-eiei>] 

So Bocll. a. n. i. : cett. 8iaypd- 
•fyeuv. If we compare the cor- 
responding clause in the pre- 
ceding context, supr. b, £vp- 
iravra ravra — ovopari, it ap- 
pears that no rendering of 
these words is satisfactory 
which separates ravra from 

^vvdnavra ra pepr] ■ (e. g. Stallb. 

" maxime propterea has partes 
cunctas — dici decebit :" which 
is also objectionable because 
of the harshness of the at- 
traction, Aex<9etrra for Xf^eVra). 
The same objection holds (un- 
less but were omitted) against 
the reading hiaypd-fyeiev, which 
was justly suspected on other 
grounds by Heindorf. Hence 
the preceding accusatives, 
which are absolute, are re- 
sumed with a new construc- 
tion in ravra ^vvdnavra ra. pepr] '. 
and the words mean either, as 
above rendered, " an art of ac- 
quisition is the most suitable 
to be named on account of all 



these parts" (cf. Polit. 269 c : 

Trpe^et prjdev. lb. 288 C : rovro 
— rovroLS ev ovopa anaa-iv npeyj/ei 

irpouayopevdi'v), or, by a return 
to poetical usage, suggested by 
the rare verb, Sid may per- 
haps be construed "through- 
out," and Sianpeyf/etev may re- 
tain something of the original 
meaning of " looking brightly 
forth." " An art of acquisition 
will, when named, be seen 
clearly to peiwade all these 
sections." Cf. Emped. Fr. w. 

5,6: rpls pev pvplas a>pas dno paKa- 
pa>v dXaXrjcrBai, yeivopevov irafTOia 
8 id xp* a eiSea 6vr}ra>v. Horn. 
Hymn to Hermes, w. 350, 1 : 
ocppa pev ovv e'SiWe Sid i|/ap.a- 
0w8ea \S>pov, pela pdX i^via 
ivavra Sie'irpeTrei' ev Kovirjaiv. The 
latter interpretation makes the 
anacoluthon easier, and gives 
a more appropriate meaning 
to the compound verb, but is 
too singular to be asserted with 
confidence. For pd\i<rra, cf. infr. 

2 66 a : TO) 8e VTTokoiTTO) o~)(e86v 

pakirrr av ~keyoiadr]v el8oo\o7ro'iKa>. 

6. npeivoL yap av] Sc. ovra 
Xe^delcra. 

IO. S^Xoi/] Sc. on. 



20<I>I2TH1\ 19 

p. 219. aE. K.Tr)TiKr/s 8e dp ov 8vo e\8r) ; to pei> €k6i>tq)v 

Trpo? €kovtol9 p.eTafi\r)TiKOV ov 8td re 8cope(ov koll 

jXLaOcaireodv koll dyopdaeoov ; to 8e \ol7tov 77 /car Not by 
,/ * v . / / j., y contractoi 
epya iq klxtcl Aoyovs yeipovpevov ^vpirav x €l P COTLKOi/ ,; ■■■ ' 
,x „ but con- 
ay €LTJ ; 5 quest. 

GEAI. ^aiVerat yovv e/c twv elp^pevoav. 

(H*E. T/ 8e ; rr}f yeipadTiKTjV dp' ov 8l\t) TprjTeov ; 

GEAI. IIt?; 

e £JE. To /zej> dvaffiairSbir o\ov dycaviaTiKov -\6ev- An ' 1 tl,is 

T€?~f , TO de KpV(j)OLOV aVTYJS irdv 6r)peVTlKOV. 10 force but 

GEAI. Not. 

aE. Ti]v 8e ye p.1^1/ 6f)pevTiK^v dXoyov to prj ov 
Tep.veiv Sixfj- 

GEAI. Aeye 07177. 

mE. To pev axj/v^pv yevovs SieXop.€i>ovs, to b* 15 

€fJL\jnJ)(OV. 

GEAI. Tt pr)v ; elirep eo~Tov ye ap(f)to. 

SE. IT coy 8e ovk eaTOv ; /cat <5e? ye rj/zay ro /ueV Now of 

catching by 

2. iAeTa(3\r)TiKov ov — ^etpcort/coi/ £u/M7raf] I. e. while undi- 
au eirj] For the independent vided. So o\ov, nav, k.t.X., in 
verb in the second of two de- what follows. 

pendent clauses, see Theset. 9. forest] Sc. repvcopev. 

149 e : bvvavrai. eyeipeiv re — /cat Bevras Heind. and Par. E. corr. 

— dfxj3\io-Kovo-iv, et passim. The MS. confirmation is too 

3. f) kcit epya rj koto. Xoyovs] slight to justify the admission 
Like Xoyois kuI TTpa^eo-t above. of a conjecture, which must 
Science is here included under however be regarded as pro- 
xetpmriKi]. Knowledge is like bable. Cf. infr. dielopevovs. But 
the kingdom of heaven, which see Polit. 302 d : kcu ravrrjv 
the violent take by force. r^plv Beriov ecrrl 8ltt\?]v. JJas 6Y7 ; 

4. xetpou/ueiw is possibly Kal rivi biaipovvres Tavrrjv. 

passive, like dvao-TT<opevov, infr. 12. clXoyov] " Illogical." 

221 (where see note), but this I. e. Undiscriminating : the 

is less probable with the ac- function of Xdyoy being to dis- 

tive xeipovTcit. preceding, supr. c. tinguish. Cf. Theret. sub fin. 

See also 2 20 c: ro pev — 17. e'iirep ecrrov ye ap(pio] 

ttouItcii ttjv drjpav. 225 C, dp<pi- I. e. if there is a di)pa twu 
o-firjTOvv. dyjrvxoi'. 



20 



IIAATONOS 



craft i n< 
kind pur- 
sues in- 
animate 
tiling !, ill 
othi i ani 



A i (1 the 
art of ani- 
mal-catch- 
ing* pursues 
either land 
or water- 
prey. Of 
aquatic 
creatures, 
some fly, 
some only 
swim ; 
whence 
fowling is 
distin- 
guished 
from fish- 



tu>u u\j/v)((oi>, dvowvpov *oj/*' irXrjV kclt evict ttjs p. 22(1 
KoAvpfitjTiKi}'? olttu pepr) KCii TOiavT u\\a (3pa^e'a, 
yalpeiv edaai, to 8e, rwv ep^rvytav (joocov ovaav 6i)pav, 
Trpoaenreiv faoOypiKrjv. 

5 0EAI. "E*TCO. 

3*E. Z(ji)oOi]ptKrjs Se up' ov SnrAovv eiSo? av Ae- 
yoiTO ev SiKr), to pev 7re(ou yei/ovs, TroAAot? eldeai 
KCU ouopaat Str)pr)p€i>ov, TretpBypiKov. to 8" eTepov 
vevaTiKov (a>ov rrav evvypo9r]piKQv ; 
10 0EAI. Yldvv ye. 

HE. NevcrTLKOv prjv to p.ev TTTTjvbv (jwAov opoopev. b 
to Se evvdpov ; 

0EAI. n»j 5' ov; 

SE. Kcd tov TTT-qvov p.r)P ye'vovs wdaa rjplv 1) 
^bOi'-jpa XeyeTdi ttov tis bpviQevTiKr). 



I. dva>vvp.ov *oj/*J MSH. iav 

(sic Bodl.) ov is Heindorf's 
conjecture. Cf. Polit. 260 e : 

dvoovvp-ov ov Tvyxdvei to yevos. 

The difference of tense (eai/ — 
ecio-cu) forbids the notion of an 
epexegesis like that in Legg. 
3, 697 a : to 8e Tpixjj SieXelv — 

TTeipadapev 8ta.Tcp.eiv. Cf., how- 
ever, Parm. Fr. 73 : t^v pev iav 
uvotjtov, dvcovvpov. Plat. Legg. 
9, 878 b : dva>vvp.ov (av. 

ttjs Ko\vfi(3r)TiKris arret /xep'/] 
E. g. fj t£>v o~7royyoKo\vp.ftr}T(ov 
6r)pa. V. Oppian Halieut. V. 
612. 

II. Net/o-rtKoG] "of Avhat 
swims." The ai'ticle is some- 
times omitted before a generic 
or collective word. Cf. infr. 
221 b : ^vfXTTao-r]s — Texv>]S. Mr. 

Grote remarks on this (Plato, 
(fee, vol. ii. p. 401): "Plato 
considers the air as a fluid 



in which birds swim." But 
the vevo-TLKti TTTrji'd are the 
water-foAvl. The expression 
irao-a — t) drjpa below probably 
implies that only a part of 
opvidevTiKr] has been previously 
mentioned. In Legg. 7, 824 c 
the evvypoOijpevTrjs is distin- 
guished from the 6pvi0evTrjs, 
and is forbidden to exercise 
his art in harbours, or in 
sacred rivers, marshes, or 
In the present passage 
is distinguished from 
"in wet" from "under 
the former term in- 
the latter. The Eleate 
shews his dialectical skill in 
proving that " aquatic sport" 
is not an adecpiate definition 
of the fisherman's craft. 

14. Tvaaa — r) 6r)pa\ I.e. not 

only of the v(vo-tik6v -m-qvov but 
of all that flies. The objection 



pools. 

evvypos 

evvdpos, 

water," 

cludinQ 



SO*I2TH2. 



21 



p. 220. 0EAI. Aeyerai yap ovv. 

HE. ToV $€ €Vv8pGV 0~)(eSoV TU (TVV0A0V aAicvTiKr). 

0EAI. Net/. 

HE. T/ oY; Tavrr)i> av tijv Orjpav ap ovk av koltol 
ixeyicrra pe'prj 8uo SieXolp.r]v ; 

GEAI. Kara. irdla ; 

HE. Ka0' a to pev epKecrtv uvtoOl ivoidraL ti)v 
6-qpav, to Se irXrjyf}. 

GEAI. ITw? Ae'yei?, kol 7777 8'iatpovp.evos eKa.Tepov\ 
c HE. To /xeV, — otl irav ocrov av kveKa KoyAvaeoj? 
etpyy tl Trepieyov, epKO? eiKo? ovopdteiv. 

GEAI. Haw p.ev ovv. 

HE. Kvprovs $7] Ka\ diKTva ko! fipoy(pvs /cod 
TropKOVS Kal tol TOiavTa pccov aWo ti 7rXrjv IpKiq 
\prj 7rpoaayopev€iv; 



5 Offiabing 

there are 
two chief 
parts, one 
working by 
enclosure, 
as with 
baskets, 
creels, and 
nets, the 
10 other In- 
striking ; 
and this 
sometimes 
at night, 
l>y torch- 
light, some- 
times by 
day with 
barbed 
* points. 



of Aristot., de Part. Anim. I. 2, 
applies here : npoo-fjKfi pr) 81a- 
cnrav emo-Tov yevos, oiov rovs opvi- 
6as rovs pev iv 7776V tovs 8° ev 
(iWrj diaipeau, Kado^'p e^ovatv al 
yeypappevai 8iaipe<r'eis. 

7. airodt] (Par. F. avTodev). 
Either (if avrodi is emphatic, 
for which somewhat rare use 
in Attic cf. Legg. 3, 702 c), 
" The one pursues his game 
with enclosures in the very- 
haunts of his prey." But the 
adverb in this case belongs 
rather to the noun than the 
verb. Or, better, referring to 
evvdpov supr., " The one pur- 
sues his game there with en- 
closures, the other by striking." 
avToBi is then taken equally 
with both clauses, and the sole 
emphasis is laid on epKonv as 
opposed to TrXijyfj. Plato im- 
plies that the word epms is to 
be derived from e'ipyw. 



10. To pev — tolovtov] The sen- 
tence is interrupted by the 
minor premiss, Kvprovs k.t.X., in 
which the general definition of 
epKos is applied, and to pev is 
more explicitly resumed in tovto 
pev. tovto refers to the processes 
connected with creels, nets, 
and the other implements just 
mentioned, amongst which nop- 
kos seems to have been rather 
a rush-basket than a net. " One 
kind — since all that encloses 
anything to prevent egress 
may naturally be termed an en- 
closure. (Certainly.) Whence 
baskets and casting-nets, and 
nooses and creels, and the like 
must be called enclosures and 
nothing else. (Exactly.) This 
department therefore of the 
sport we shall name 'fishing 
by enclosure.' " 

14. aAXo] Bodl. om. 



22 



IIAATI2N02 



0EAI. OvScv. 



\). 220. 



These are 
either im- 
pelled from 
above, as 
in spearing, 
or jerked 
up from be- 
neath, with 
canes or 
rods, into 
the head 
or lips of 
the prey. 



HE. — Tovto p.ev dpa epnoOrjpLKov tijs dypa? to 

fXtpOS (f))](TOfJL€V, ?} TL TOLOUTOV. 

0EAI. Nat. 
S aE, To de ayKLarpots kcil rpioSovai irXr)yfj yiyvo- 
pcevov erepov p.ev eKelvov, 7tXi)ktlki]v 6Y tivol Qr)pav 
rjpa.9 irpoatnreiv evl Xoyco vuv ypecov. r/ tl tl? dv, d 
[w] Gea/r^re, ehroi kccXXlov ; 

0EAI. ' ApeXcopev tov bvoparo?' apKel yap koll 

10TOVTO. 

37E. Trjs tolvvv TrXrjKTiKrjs to p.ev VVKTepLVOV, ol/xai, 
Trpos irvpos (f)co? ytyvop.evov vir avTcov tgjv 7repi ttjv 
Orjpav 7rvpevTiKi)v pi-jOrjvaL avp(3e'^r/Kev. 

0EAI. Udvv ye. 
x 5 3*E. To Se ye pteOrfpepLvov, coy eyovT&v ev ciKpois 
dyKLCTTpa Kai tcov TpioSovTcov, ttolv dyKLaTpevTLKOV. 

0EAI. AeyeTcu yap ovv. e 

SE. ToD TOLVVV dyKLCTTpeVTLKOV TYjS 7tXt]KTLKT]? TO 

fiev avooOev eh to /car 0) yLyvopcevov 6\a to toIs TpLo- 
20 SovaLV ovTco ptaXiaTa \prjcrOaL TpLodovTia tl?, oipai, 
KeKXrjTaL. 

0EAI. <£>acrl yovv TLves. 

S?E. To de ye Xolttov Icttlv ev eTL p.6vov, a>$ threw, 
eldos. 



8. [4]] 3.1 

12. Trpos 77V pos <pa>s yiyv6fievov\ 
The nocturnal branch of the 
art of striking fish, as it is pur- 
sued by fire-light, has received 
from those who practise it the 
name of ' firing.' 

I 6. nav ayKurTpevTiKou] Sc. ep- 
prjOr) from prjOrjvai avpfteftrjKev. 

dyKto-rpevTiKov] This notion 
reappears in Legg. 7, 823 e 
(a curious passage) : h cpiXoi, 



eld' i>p.as pr]re t\s emdvp,ia pfjr 
epcos rrjs 7re/H dukarrav Stjpas Trore 
Xu/3oi, pr]8e aytuarpeias' prjS" oXeos 
tt)s rcbf evvdpcov £a>oov, prjre iypr)- 
yopocn pi']re ev8oV(Ti Kvprois (cf. 
SUpr. b.) apybv 8rjpav dicnrovovpe- 

vois. (Cf. Opp. Halieut. 3, et 
sqq. : Kvprois, 01 Kvao-aovras eovs 
r)v(ppr]vav avaKTas.} 

2 0. oiirco] Qc.avcoOev els to kcltw. 

Xpr)0-6ai~\ Sc. tovs nepl ttjv re^- 
vr]v. Cf. Gorg. 457 C, hvvavrai. 



p. 220. GEAI. To irolov ; 

aE. To tt}s tvavTias TavTy 7rXr)yr]?, uyKicrTpcp re 
521. yiyvopevov kcu tcov lyOvcav ov)( ?) tis av Tvyr) rou o~go- 
/xaros 1 , cocnrep tols Tpiodovaiv, aXXa irep\ Tiqv K((pdXrjV 
kou to o~TQ\±a rod OrjpevOevTOs eKaarore, koll KarcoOev 
eh TOwavTiov avco pa(38oL$ kcu kclXcc/jlois uvacrTrco- 
fxevov' ov 11 (frrjcrofiev, co Gecu'r^re, Sew Tovvopa 
Xeyeadai ; 

GEAI. Aokco fxev, oirep dpri 7rpov0€/xe0a Sew 
e^evpelv, tovt clvto vvv chroTereXeaOaL. 

aE. Nw apa Tr)? acnraXievTLKrjS iripi o~v re Kciyco 

b avvcop.oXoyr]Kapev ov fiovov tovvo/jlo,, dXXa koll top 

Xoyov Trep\ clvto Tovpyov elXrjtyapLtv 'iKavm. £vpma- 

o~r]9 yap T€)(i>r)? to fiev rjpicrv Liepos ktt]tlkov rjv, 

KT7JTLKOV Se ^ipcOTlKOV, )(eipCOTLKOV Se OrjpEVTLKOV, TOV 



2G<M2TH2. 



23 



Tliis last 

distinction 

completes 

the .Mini 
fcion of the 

-Art Of 

angling." 



Of which 
we now 
possess in 
common, 
not the 
name alone, 
but an 
exact con- 
J 5 ception ex- 
pressed in 
words. 



3. fi tis av Tvxn] " Wherever 
one may chance to hit." rv-y- 
xdva is here in transition from 
the literal to the metaphorical 
meaning (from "hit" to 
" chance"). 

4. coo-rrep rdls Tpiohov(nv\ Sc. 
yiyverai rj TrXrjyrj. 

6. avawTTcoiievov] This neuter 
participle, like yiyvopevov, is pas- 
sive, the cognate accusative of 
the active becoming the sub- 
ject of the passive verb. See 
General Introduction. " The 
kind which is characterized by 
the stroke opposite to this, 
made with a barbed point not 
in any chance part of the body 
as is done with spears, but 
about the head and mouth of 
the prey, and in the opposite 
direction, being effected with 
an upward jerking movement 
by means of rods and canes." 



9. Strep — egevpeiv] " The dis- 
covery of which we set before 
US as a task." Cf. t'i ovv npoTa- 
gofxeOa supra, and, for the pleo- 
nasm of Sell/, Rep. 6, 503 c : 

fjv yap 8irfk6opev <fiv(Tiv 8elv vtt- 
apxeiv avro'is. lb. 7 5 535 a : 
8e7v exXeKTeov. Phil. 5° d. 

I 2. tov \6yov TvepX avro Tovpyov] 

" The definition embracing 
closely the thing itself," vid. 
supr. 218 c. Cf. also Legg. 
10, 895 d (already quoted) : 

irepl eKacrrov Tpla voelv — ev p,ev 
ttjv ovaiav, ev 8e rfjs ovo-las tov 
\6yov, ev 8e to ovop.a, with which 

compare Ep. 7, 342. 

13. el\rj(pap.ev] The expression 
is amplified in the second clause 
and a new verb introduced, as 
often in Plato. 

14. to pev rjpio~v pepos] " The 

one half" — the othei - , 7roi7]TtKrj, 
is passed over here. 



24 



I1AATQN02 



8e Oi]p€VTiKou tcouOypiKoi', tcooOiipiKOv Se IvvypoQi)- p 
ptKov, u>vypoO)]piKov Se tI) KarcoOeu rprjpa o\ov 
aXievTiKov, aAievriKrjs de ttXiiktikov, 7rAi]KTiKr]? 8e 

(tyKKTTptVTLKOV' TOVTOV $6 TO 7T€pl TY)V KOLTCx>6eV (ll>(jd 

5 irXtiy^v uva(J7ru>p.evriv, air avrri? rrj<> TTpaijecos d(f)o- c 
pLotcoOeu rovvopa, i) vvv aaTruXtevTiK^ (jfTrjOeura Itt'l- 
k\i~\v yeyovev. 

0EAI. Ylavrawacri pev ovv tovto ye lkolvco? 8e8r']- 
Xootcli. 



2. to Ktircodev] Cf. infr. 266 a. 

4. to 7rep\ tt)v] " The class 
which comprised." Cf. supr. 
tov \6yov nepl civto Tovpyov. 

5. an ai/Trjs Trjs Ttpu^ecos d(po- 

poiuidev Tovvopa] I.e. it is pro- 
posed to derive danraXuvs from 
dvao-nda. See also Tim. Lex. 

52 : do-7raXLevs, d\i(vs, dno tov 
dvucmqv tijv aypav. HesycllillS 

has preserved the real deriva- 
tion from ao-TTakos, an Athama- 

Tt X vr) 

{irOirjTlKl]) 1 KTTjTLKT] 

(p.eTalB\r]TLKr]) — L. — ^eipcoTiKT] 

(dyeovio-TiKr)) — I^OrjpevTiKi] 
{6i]pn tcov dyj/v)((bv) — ' — ^coodTjpLKrj 

(rre^odrjpiKT]) — ' — evvypodrjptKi) 

(opvidevTiicfi) — I — dXievTiKi] 

(epKodrjpiKrj'j — ' — tt\i]kti.ki] 

(jTVpeVTlKT]) 1 dyKtO~Tp€VTlKr) 



nian word for 'fish.' (Passow 
Lexic. s. v.) 

6. 17 vvv do-TvuXitVTiKrj £r)TT)- 
6e'io-a\ T. e. da7Ta\i(VTiKr], 77 vvv 

(i)T7]6eio-a. Cf. infr. 231 b : iv 

T(p vvv Xo'yw Trapa(pav€VTi. Note 

the apposition of neuter and 
fern. : to irepl — 17 k.t.A., and of 
the name with the thing : t<.v- 

vopa with 1) dcmaXievTLKi]. TliC 

following is a summary of the 
ahove divisions : 



8. TiavTairao-i pev ovv tovto ye 

cKavcbs deSfoaiTai] The method 
of dichotomies has proved ade- 
quate for the definition of an 
art so simple and familiar as 
that of the angler. The notion 
of the Sophist, however, is more 
complex, and after several par- 
tial attempts, the definition of 
him is found to be impracti- 
cable, until we lay aside this 



(rpiodovria) — ' — do-Tra\.ievTiKi']. 
method for a time and review 
some of our fundamental ideas. 
It is difficult to say how far 
the first or tentative part of 
the inquiry is seriously intended 
by Plato as an illustration or 
application of method. There 
is a tinge of satirical humour 
obvious in almost every line. 
This was the motive for the 
choice of the angler as an ex- 



20<1>I2TH2. 



2.5 



p. 221. SE. <l>€p€ 8/], Kara tovto to Trapuhtiypa koll tov 
o-o(j)iarrji> iTriyeip&pev evpeiv, o tl ttot ecrTiv ; 
0EAI. l^o/ntSfj fieu ovv. 
iftE. Kai /x?;^ €«€iv6 y rjv to (rjTrjpa TrpcoTOv, 

TTOTtpOV l8lC0T1fV 7] TLVOL Tt\Vr]V tyOVTOL 0€T€OV ell/at 5 

tov acnraXievT-qv. 

0EAI. Nat. 

HE. Kou zw <5r; tovtov ISicoTyv Orjaofitv, co Qeai- 
d r?;re, ?} 7ravTa.7ra.0-Lv cos aXrjdcos o~o(pio~Tr)V ; 

0EAI. OvSapLCos IduorrjV pavOavco yap o Aey«9,co? 10 
*7ra^roy* <5et toiovtos elvai to ye bvo/ia tovto e^oov. 

2E. 'AAAa rti/a Te^vrjv amov rjpuv ZyovTa, cos 
eoiKe. OtTeov. 






Foil. 

this ( 
pie Li t as 
endeavour 

to find til*: 

nature of 
the Sophist 

also. 



Is he an 
artist, as 

the fisher- 
man was ? 
His name 
declares 
him to he, 
par excel- 
lence, an 
artist. 



ample, this prompts the in- 
clusion of war and tyranny, 
pleading and arguing, under 
SijpevTiKr], and that of poetry 
and learning amongst the mer- 
chant's wares, and the defini- 
tion of higgling in the market 
as au inartistic kind of con- 
troversy. A deeper irony un- 
derlies the admission of the 
Sophist's claim to be considered 
as a purifier of the soul. Yet 
inseparably bound up with this 
tone of sarcasm there is the 
scientific spirit, which seeks for 
general truths and disregards 
common opinion. The defini- 
tion of the tyrant or the war- 
rior as a hunter of men falls 
in with Plato's satiric fancy, 
but has also an element of 
scientific truth, and belongs 
to the effort to connect things 
apparently diverse under one 
idea. This mixture of satire 
and inquiry finds characteristic 
expression in infr. 227 b : 
tov KTTjo-aadai yap f-'vexa vovv 



irao-av Texvmv to £vyyeves Kai to 
flrj gvyyei'es KaTavoelv neipcopevr] (17 
twv \6ya>v Texyrf) Tipa npos tovto 
e'£ to-ou Trao-as — aepivoTepov 8e n 
tov 81a o-TpaTTjyiKTJs *] epdeipiaTiKTjs 
drj'XovvTa 8r]pevTiKr)v ov8ev vevo- 
p.LKev, dXX as to rro\v yavvoTepov . 

8. Kai vvv 8r/] "So now also." 
Ka\ to be taken closely with vvv. 

9. as akrjQms o-o<plCTTT]v] The 

word here approaches the an- 
cient meaning of " contriver," 
" clever one," " skilled prac- 
titioner." 

II. *TravT6s* del] The MSS. 
vary between navras and ov 
navTas, the latter of which has 
grown out of the former. A 
further corruption (n) is toiov- 
tov — tov — exovTa. The correc- 
tion is due to the Zurich edi- 
tors. For 7tovt6s Set, cf. Aesch. 

Prom. 961 : noXXov ye Ka\ tov 
navTos e'XAei7rco. ib. IO08 : tov 
TravTos Se'w. 

to ye ovofia tovto f\cov] " Since 

he bears this name." Cf. Polit. 
260 C : 8ean6(ovTd ye. 



26 I1AATQN02 

0EAI. TtW TTOT OVV d)) TUVTljV ; ]). 22 

Buthia 3lE. ' Ap co 7rpo? Oetov vyvorjKUpev TuvSpos tov 

relation t* 

the angler dvdpa ovTa £vyyevr) ; 

does not r , ' 

end here. 0EAI. TtW TOO ; 

5 HE. Tov dairakitvTriv tov cro(fjtaTOu. 
0EAI. IIjj; 

They are HE. Ql]p6VT(X TLV€ KaTCL(f)aiV€Cr0OV a/JL(f)C0 fJLOL. e 

0EAI. Tlvos di]pas arepos; tov ptev yap erepov 



both sport: 
men : and 
each pur- 
sues a cer- €L7T0fX€V 
tain livi 



yevovs. 12, 954 d : eKT-qpevos, o Oe 
10. vxiv 8iei\opev] Cf. Thepet. fr)T<ov, alib. Pliileb. 56 d : oXXtjv, 
159 c, vvv diTjXOofJLtv, where ttjv 8e aXKrjv ; Polit. 291 e: 
there is the same variation of rvpawlbi, to 8e fiao-tXiKJj. Phsed. 
MSS. ; some inserting 817, which 105 e. Bodl. and A ire^ov. 
on account of 81 succeeding 2 i/Enrpeneo-Oov]" Their paths 
may very possibly have dropped diverge when they have reach- 
out, ed the art of animal-hunting, 
vtva-TiKov pepovs, to oe ire£oi>] the one turning to the sea- 
For the omission of to pev, which shore and to rivers and lakes, 
is present in some MSS., com- to angle for the creatures that 
pare Soph. Trach. 117 : rpeqba, are therein." 



HE. At^a 7rov vvv 8iel\op.ev tt]v dypav Trdcrav, V6V- 

CTTLKOV pt€pOV9, TO 8e 7T€(^OV T€pVOVT€9. 

0EAI. Nat. 

HE. Kal to pev SirjXOopev, oaov irepl to. vevorTiKa 
tcov ivvSpcov to Se ire^ov eldaapev dcryio-TOv. elirov- 
15 re? otl iToXvubes e'lrj. 

0EAI. Haw ye. p. 222. 

HE. Me'x/)* ptev tolvvv IvTavQa 6 ao(picrTr)s re /cat 
o aaiTaXtevTrjs a/xa goto tt]? kt7]TIKt]? Teyyrj^ iropev- 
ecr&ov. 

-° 0EAI. 'FtOlKGLTOV yOVV. 

From this £?E. ^KTpeireaOov Se ye goto 7-77? ^tooOrjpLKrj^, 6 



2. rdubpos tov avdpa] Cf. to S' ai/|ei. Eurip. Hippolyt. 

Kep. 5, 455 d: to yevos tov 233, 4. Theset. 181 d. 



20M2TH2. 



27 



p. 222. p-tv eVrt OaXarrav irov koll 7rorap.ov? koll XipLvas, rav 
T0VT0L9 £coa OrjpevaopLtvos. 

GEAI. Tifirjv; 

SE. O <5e ye etn rrjv yrjv koll Trorapovs erepovs 
av tlvols, ttXovtov koll veoTrjTO? oiov Xei/mcovas a(j)66- 5 
vovf, rav tovtols OpepLpcara xeLpwaopLevos. 
b 0EAI. Um Xeyeis ; 

HE. Tr/s ire^rjs &r)pa$ yiyveaOov Svo p-eylarco 
rive fJteprj. 

0EAI. Yiolov eKccrepov ; ic 



path di 
1 1 rge. The 

Ml"!' | 

i flu 
rivers, 
lakes, and 
teeming 
seas. The 
Sophist 
turns him 
to the land: 
or if to 
rivers they 
are the 
rivers of 
wealth, 
which 
nourish 
bounteous 



i. 7rov gives the touch of 
conscious iudefiniteness in 
which the preciseness of the 
Greek language delights. 

4. 'O 8e ye errl ttjv yrjv — ] 

" To very different rivers of 
wealth, and rich meadow-lands 
of generous youth." Lit. " to 
rivers of wealth, a different 
sort of rivers." This punctu- 
ation avoids the confusion of 
the two metaphors (river and 
meadow) and preserves the 
appropriateness of each. For 
the former, cf. iEsch. Prom. 

805 : 01 XP v(J °PP VTOV oIkov<tiv 
ap(fn vafxa UXovrcovoi nopov, 

where the notion of abundance 
is. associated with the image of 
golden sands ; and for the 
latter, Soph. Trach. 143 : to 
yap vea^ov iv roioicrSe jSofr/cerat 
-^oapoLcnv avrov. 

For the metaphorical use of 
the word irorapos to denote 
abundance, cf. also Tim. 43 a : 

ai 8e els ttotq/jlov eVSe^eTcrcu 7ro- 

Xvv — viz. the flux of corporeal 
particles in the body. The 
word \eip.a>vas is naturally sug- 
gested by the notion of a fer- 
tilizing river with green banks, 



and perhaps partly by a false 
echo from Xip,vas preceding. 

8. Tr)s Tre^s 6i)pas k.t.X.] The 
description of 8i)pevriK^ in Legg. 
7, 823 b should be compared, 
line by line, with this passage : 

6r\pa yap TtapnoXv tl irpdypa. eo-n, 
TrepieiXr]p.p,evov ovopari vvv o~xe86v 
ivi. 7rok\rj p.ev yap i) ra>v ivv8pa>v, 
tvoXXtj 8e rj rav Trrr]vu>v, irapnoXv 
8e Kal to tvepX to. 7re£a drjpevpara, 
ov povov drjplcov, aXXa Ka\ ttju rav 
dvdpamcDV ai^iov ivvoelv 8i)pav, ttjv 
re Kara ir6Xepov : tyoXXtj 8e /cat 77 
Kara (piXiav Orjpevovaa, rj p.eu enat- 
vov, T] 8e xj/oyov e\ei' Kal KXaTrelat,, 
Ka\ Xy]o~Ta>v /ecu o~TpaTOTre8av arpa- 
TOTre8ois Brjpai. 

yiyveo-6ov\ Bodl. Vat. Ven. 
n. yLyveo-Qa, which might be 
defended from emap.ev follow- 
ing. But the word is explana- 
tory of exxpeireo-Qov in what 
precedes, and the v is more 
likely to have been dropped 
than to have been inserted 
wrongly, especially considering 

the SpoioTfXevrov of peyiara). 

The 61'ipa tcov ijpepcov is termed 

peyLCTTOV as including o-Tpari]yui, 
XrjariKr), 8iKaviKrj, epcoTlKrj, koXu- 

KlKl], CTOCpllTTlKl]. 



E 2 



IS 



IIAATI2N02. 



pastures i 
generous 
youth. 



Now land 

animals arc 
tame and 
wild ; and, 
if man is a 
tame crea- 
ture, tame 
creatures 
also ran 
be made 
a prey. 



HE. To pev riiiv rjptpoyv, to 8e tcov dypicov. 

BEAI. Etr €(.ttl tl? 6i)pa tcov ypc-'pcov ; 

HE. Ei' irlp ye iorTiv av6pa>iro<s ijpepov (a>ov. 0e? 
8e ottyj xalpcL?, e'/re p.r)8ev TiOeis ijpepov, e'/re aAAo 
5 p.ev i]p.epov ti, tov he avOpcoirov aypiov, etre rjpepov 
pcev Aeyei? av tov avOpioirov, avOptoiTtov 8e prjdeplav 
rjyel 6r\pav. tovtcov '\ biroTep^ av r]yel (j)i\ov elprjoQai 
aoi, tovto iip.lv Stopiaov. 



p. 222. 



2. eira expresses surprise. 
Cf. The^et. 207 d. 

3. El' trip ye eariv dvd, rjp. £.] 

This is not always fully ad- 
mitted. See Theset. 174 d: 

Bvo-KoXwrepov 8e eKelvasv ££>ov Kai 
e-m^ovXoTepov noipaiveiv re Kai 
(38dXXeiv vupi^ei avrovs. Legg. 6, 
766 a '. "AvBpumos 6Y, wt (papev, 
ijpepov, opcos prjv naiSelas pev 
opdrjs tv\ov Kai (pvaecos eirvxovs 
6eioTdTOV rjpepaiTaTov re ££)ov yiy- 
vecrBat (piXel, pr) Ikciucos 8e r) pr) 
Ka\£>s rpacfrev aypiioTciTov onocra 

(pvei yr\. Cf. Xen. Cyr. I. 1, § 2 : 

Tracras roivvv tcis ayeXas ravras 
ebonovpev opav paXXov edeXovo-ai 
Tveldeadai rots vopevo~iv r) tovs 
avBpconovs rois apxovai. For 
Ti6e\s — Xeyeis, cf. Supr. 221 d, 

and note. 

7. foTrorep'T av rjyel (piXov el- 
prja-Oal aoi] The plural onoTepa, 

with 4>iXov and tovto following, 
is difficult ; and the word im- 
plies two, whereas there are 
three if not four alternatives. 
Badham's conjecture, o ti irep 
&v (cf. infr. 255 a, Legg. 1, 645 
c), is probably right, rjyel is the 
Bodleian reading ; av is to be 
taken with elpija-dai (ptXov o-ot : 
" Whichever of these alterna- 
tives you think will please 
you when spoken." Com- 



pare infr. 223 b: TO 7TpOO-?)KOV 

ovop av rjyovpat KaXelv avrov. 

There is no objection to the 
repetition of the same word 
r]yel in a somewhat different 
connexion ; cf. Theset. 148 b : 
ovk av Surcupyrji' — wa-rrep trepl — 
ttjs Wdjiews. alib. 

8. tovto rjplv Siopiaov] The 
Bodleian and the cognate MSS. 
(including Flor. i.) have biopi- 
o-reov. This could only mean, 
" Whichever of these alterna- 
tives you think will please you, 
this we must decide upon." 
But this reading, though not 
altogether absurd (cf. Polit, 

261 e *. KaOarvep bianeXevus 

iroirjreov), may probably be 
classed amongst those which, 
although occurring in the best 
MSS., are traceable to the 
wrong-headed ingenuity of the 
scribes, like etjaio-101 o-otpol for 
e|i}s ol crocpoi in Theset. 1 52 e 
(Bodl.), aKpiftccv for aKpcov, ib. 
148 c. (Bodl. A. n.) The impe- 
rative is required by 6e$ pre- 
ceding. For tovto rjplv diopiaov , 
cf. Gorg. 488 d : tovto poi avTo 
o~a(pa>s biopiaov, tovtov tj eTepov 
eo~Ti to Kpelrrov Ka\ to fieXTLov 
Kai to lo-\vp6Tepov. Rep. IO, 
598 a : 'A pa ola eariv r) oia (pai- 
verai ; tovto yap en 8iopiaov. 



20<M2TH2. 29 

\%. 0EAI. 'AAA' rj/JLoi? re rjfMpov, co £eW, rjyovfiai 
£(ooi>, drjpav re avOpwiraiv tivai Xe'yco. 

3*E. AlTT7jV TOLVVV KOLl TTJL* rjfJL€po9^piKl)V ei7T0)/JL€l>. 

0EAI. Kara ti XeyovTt? ; 

AE. T?)^ /X6// Xr]0~TLK1]V KOLL aV^paTToBLCTTLKrjV K.OLI 5 This hap- 

\ \ 5- / \ . /,\/ P enB either 

TVpaVVlKTjV KOLl ^VpLTTaCTaV TY]V TToXepLLKyV, €V TTaVTa through 

n / n / i / force or 

piaiov Ur/pav opicra/jLevoi. through 

0EAI. KaXm. pe,su " ion - 

SE. Tt)v <5e' ye 8iK.avLKi]v roll Srj/j.i]yopiKr]i> kou 

7TpO<TOfjll\T]TlK7Jl>, €V CLV TO ^VVoXoV IT iO av OV py LK1]V 10 

d riva fiiav riyviqv irpoawirovTes. 
6EAI. 'Op0m. 

HE. T^9 &) 7ndaV0VpyiKrj? SlTTOC XiycopLeV yevr). And per- 

suasion 
may be 
public o 
private. 

0EAI. YiyvecrOov yap ovv tido? eKarepov. 

3*E. OvKOVV ai) TT]? i8lO0r]p€VTlKrjs TO /ueV pucrOap- Persuasion 

/ , v jv rs , , in private 

VtVTLKOV eO~Tl, TO be OCOpoCpopLKOV ; sometimes 

0EAI. Ou piavOaVGi. wards, and 

H-cpi m ~ " > ' r\' '* * »/ sometimes 

A ti. 1 27 tcov ep&vTcov urjpa. TOV VOW, 0)? toiKas, 20 on the 

v / contrary 

oi>7rtt> 7rpoaeo-yes. brings 



/"vtt< at tt " suasion 

BEAI. Ilcua; 

^TT' T^ * " '£•' v £ v £> ' ' public or 

A hi. 1 o ^.tej/ eTepou iota., to be or/pLoaia yiyvop.tvov. Tr 



gifts. 



5. T?jv fih \j]o-TiKi'jv — ] Com- cler one heading, 

pare Ar. Pol. I. 3 : Oi 8' anb 17. pia6apvevTiKoi> — ptaGapvev- 

6i]pas C&>o-ii>, tca\ 6t)pa<; (repot tikov] I prefer giving the form 

erepas, oluv oi pev airb A^oreta?, of the word which appears ill 

01 $' acp' akielas — ol S' air opvl- all the MSS. (instead of pi- 

6u>v r) Brjplaiv aypiav. Alb ko.\ r) crdapvrjTLK.), though suspected by 

Tro'XepiKr] cpvo~ei kttjtikt] ttws ea-rar Heinclorf, whose dictum (Quod 

rj yap 6-qpevTucr) pepos avTrjs, jj SeZ in Lexicis, auctore nullo, pro- 

XPi)o~6ai Ttpos re ra Brjpici Kai rav fei'tur verbum ptcrdapveveiv, val- 

dv6p6iTru)v 00-01 necpvKOTes apx^o-dai de vereor ne a sermonis ana- 

prj 6e\ov<rtv. logia abhorreat) is open to 

10. tt poao pikrjT lkt]v = the art question. Why not picrBapvevco 

of intercourse. The word is from piaSapvos, as K.cmr]\fva> from 

invented in order to include Kanr/'Kos 1 Still it may be cor- 

love-making and sophistry un- rupted from ISiodijpeur. 



so 



riAATQNOS 



Lovers, for 
instance, 
lavish pre- 
sents "ii 



v. I 



mi 



they win. 



Of mercen- 
ary persua- 
sion, one 
1. ranch 
allures 
through 
pleasure, 
and, as for 
hire, ex- 
pects no 
more than 
to be fed. 
This is 
called 
flattery. 
Another 
kind pro- 
fesses to 
impart 
virtue, and 
takes a 
money fee. 
What is 



0EAI. Tovwepi; p. 

HE. ' Qti roi9 drjpevOdcrt Scopa 7rpocre7rt8i8oao~ii>. 

0EAI. ' AXydearara Xe'yet?. e 

HE. Tovto pev tolvvv epcoTiKr/s T€)(W]9 earco elSos: . 
5 0EAI. Udvv ye. 

HE. Tou Se ye pucrOapvevTiKov to pev irpoao- 
ptXovu Sid -)(apLTOs koll TravTanvaai Si rjSovrj? to 
Se'Xeap ireironip.evov kou tov piaOov irpaTTopevov 
Tpo(f)-qv eavTcp povov KoXa.KiKi]i>, coy eycopai, irdvTes p. 
iofyalpev av rj8vi>TiKr)V Tiva Te^vrjv elvai. 

0EAI. YIcos yap ov ; 

HE. To Se eirayyeXXopevov pev coy apeTrjs eveim 
Tag bpiiXias iroiovpievov, pnaOov Se vo pier pa irpaTTo- 
pievov, dpa ov tovto to yevos eTepw Trpoo~emeiv d^iov 
Hoi/opart,; 

0EAI. Umydp ov ; 

HE. Tivi 8r) tovtco ; rreipco Xeyeiv. 



223. 



2. 7rpo(T€7T-t^tSoao"ii'] The pre- 
positions imply " in addition to 
all the means employed to win 

them." (npocreTi 8a>pa yp. 2.B.) 

4. ipu>riKT)s Tex v is — eiSos] 
Gen. of apposition. 

6. Tou de ye piadapvevTiKOv 

elvai] " But that sort of hireling 
the object of whose commerce 
is to gratify, and whose lure is 
baited with any kind of plea- 
sure, while the only hire which 
lie exacts is sustenance for him- 
self, I presume we should all 
describe as the flatterer, who is 
one of the sweeteners of life." 

8. ■neTroirip.ivov ] pf. passive 

with middle signification. 

IO. TjSvvTiKip Tiva Tex vr } v ~\ " al1 

art of sweetening." These words 
express the function of koKcikikt] 
more precisely. There is no 



need of inserting fj before ^w. 
with Heindorf and some later 
editors. Cf. Theast. 175 e : p-q- 

8e 6\f/6v rj8vvai t] 6a>na<; Xoyovs, 

where cookery and flattery 
seem to be included under 
rjSvvTiKT] ; and Gorg. 462-465, 
where however KuXaKela is the 
general word, including o^o- 
noua, prjTopLKTj, and the rest. 
Other instances occur (e. g. 
p.eTa$\r}TiKTi supr. compared with 
infr. 224 c) in which the same 
word has alternately a general 
and specific meaning. 

12. To Se — ovopan] " But an- 
other sort, professing to make 
virtue the end of his inter- 
course, while exacting his hire 
in the shape of coin, — is it not 
worth while to address this 
kind by a different name?" 



20M2TH2. 



31 



p. 223. 0EAI. ArjXov 8i]' tov yap ao({)io-T)jv poi Sokou- 
pcev avevprjKevou. tout ovv eycoye elircov to irpoo~i)K.ov 
ovopi av rjyovpcai KoKtlv avTOv. 
b HE. Kara Srj tov vvv, co Qec/.LTrjTe, Xoyov, cos* 



4. Kara 8rj — 8r)pn] The obser- 
vation of Schleiermacher, that 
thei'e are several redundant 
words in this passage, was mis- 
applied by Heindorf and Stall- 
baumwhen they rejected picrdap- 

VLKrjs as Well as KrrjTiKrjs, ne(o8r]- 

pias, and r'lpepodrjpiKijs. For the 
science which takes rewards 
includes the flatterer with the 
Sophist, who stands alone how- 
ever in taking his reward in 
money. The word ireCodrjpLas 
can hardly be retaiued, x e P- 
aaias being evidently substi- 
tuted for this with reference to 

Slipr. 222 a: 6 be ye eir\ ri)v yrjv. 
The Case of r)pepo8rjpiKr)S is 

somewhat different. For there 
might be other tame creatures 
besides man which became the 
objects of the chase (e.g. pheas- 
ants and deer in modern 
times); compare Polit. 262 b. 
The MSS., however, vary as to 
the form of the word. 

xetpodTiKris, which the edi- 
tors retain after oliteiaiTiKrjv, 
has very slight authority (Ven. 



2. Aid. Bas. 1, 2. St.) The 
word is not indispensable ; 
for oucetomfo/s might be fairly 
substituted (according to the 
spirit of the present passage) 
for xeipojrtK^s, as a softer word 
— " Convey the wise it call." 
We may therefore either read 

KTr}TiKi)s, OLKeia>TiKrjs, 01' omit 
XeipaTiKijs and KTTjTiKrj^, taking 
otKeLooTiKrjs as a substitute for 
both. The Stranger is not 
always quite exact in reca- 
pitulating. Thus, infr. 224 d, 
peTa(3\r]TiKri is substituted for 
aWciKTiKr], and the peTa(H\t]TtKr) of 
the previous argument is omit- 
ted. Hence it is unnecessary, 
with Heindorf and Stallbaum, 
to supply the missing link tti- 
davodiipiasinike present passage. 
Cf. Polit. 261 e, where such va- 
riation of terms is justified. 

nefodripias, if genuine, distin- 
guishes Tre£a from TTrrjva, x e P~ 
crains, 7re£a from evvbpd, but X- 

should then come first. 

The divisions have been as 
follows : 



Texvr) 

TTOir]TlKr]-^—KT^TLKr) 
peTaffk-qTlKTj 1 \eip(£>TlKT] 

dyaviCTTiKr] ' 8r]pevriKT} 

twv d^vx^v 1 £ao6r)piKr] 

ire£o8rjpiKi) ' ivvypoBrjpiKr) 

OpVldeVTLKT] ' aKieVTLKT] 

i8>]ptKrj--l 7r\rjKTiKr) 

(3iaios Br)pa *— — TridavovpyiKi] TrvpevriKi] — ' — dyKiarTpeVTiKrj 

i] bijpoala yiyvopevr] — >■ — IbiodrjpevriKii rpinbovria — ' — danciKievTiKr) 



tuv dypicov-i—f]pepo8r]pLKr] epi< 



called ' 

t<» have 
found the 
Sophist. 



8a>po(popiKr r 



— I picrdapvevTiKi] 

KoXaKlKrj 1 acXpKTTlKrj. 



32 



IIAATUNOI' 



Still let us 
look at this 
many-sided 
creature in 
.another 
aspect. 
For the 
divisions 
we have 
made afford 
an opening 
for defining 
him in a 
different 
way. One 



eoiKev, ■>'] T€)(i/r)S oii<(ta)TiK))<>, -|/cr/;nK?;9 f", drjpevrucfjs, p 
(fix)0)]pia<?, "fwe^odrjpiwf, \eporaia9, "f'qfjjEpodjjpucrjsf, 

av0p(oiTo6r)pLa$, i8io0r/pia?, ixia6apvLKr)<>\ vopuapaTO- 
7tco\ik)]9, 8o^o7rat8evriK7]9, vecov irXovcrLwv kou iv 
5 Sofjcov yiyvoplvr) drjpa 7rpoapi]Teov, a)? 6 vvv Aoyoy 
i]puv avpfialvei, aofpiartKr). 
0EAI. YlavTairacn pev ovv. 

HE. 'En oe /ecu Tjjde ?8(opev ov yap tl (f)av\r}? 
peToypv earn reyyrjs to vvv (rjTovpevov, aAA' ev p.aka c 
io7roiKi\r]?. Kal yap ovv ev toIs irpoaOev elprjpevois 
(j)avracrp.a irape^eTai, p.i] tovto o vvv avro rjp.ei9 
(pape'v, aAA' erepov elval tl yevos. 
0EAI. Uy 8y ; 

HE. To Trj? KTrjTLKrjs Te^v^s 8ltt\ovv rjv ei86s 
' 5 ttov, to p.ev O-qpevTLKOV p.epos eypv, to 8e aXXaKTLKOV. 



23. 



4. §ogo7rai.§evTiKTjs] This refers 
to Slipr. a : inayyeKkopcvov — 
noiovpevov. 

kol ev86§av] Cf. Protag. 
316 b, where Socrates recom- 
mends Hippocrates to the con- 
sideration of Protagoras : 'ln- 

TTOKpaTrjs o8e ecrrl pev ra>v eVi^co- 
pia>v, 'A7roXAoScopov vios, oiKias 
peydXrjs re Kai cv8a.ifj.ovos' avros 
be Trjv (pvaiv 8oKel evdpiXXos eivai 
to'is rjXiKiwrais. imdvpelv 8e poi 80- 
Kel eWoyipos yevecrdai iv rfj Trohei. 

The use of pe'roxdv io-n for 
fitrexei, like that of the par- 
ticiple and auxiliary verb 
noticed above, is in the style 
of these dialogues. Cf. also 
Phaedr. 262 d. 

7. ovv] "In accoi'dance with 
this remark," i. e. consistently 
with the creature's manifold 
cunning. 

8. Tfj8( 'tioopiv] Eodl. FA An 



eldcofiev. This might be de- 
fended from Theset. 202 e : 
'la-riov 81). But the text pre- 
sents a more lively image, and 
is in better accoi'dance with 
Plato's usual manner. This 
corruption is frequent. 

1 1 . qbdvT .TTapex-]" tie (aur6,the 
subject of our inquiry) holds 
forth the appearance ; leads us 
to imagine." No English word 
exactly corresponds to <pdv- 
Tacrpa here, which retains the 
verbal notion : the German 
Schein is perhaps nearly equi- 
valent. Cf. Theast. 199 c : 8a- 

voTfpov pevrot Ttddos 0AX0 napa- 

(fialveo-dai poi 8oKei, As we re- 
view the previous argument, 
the Sophist shews his face to 
us on the other side of our 
division-line. 

1,5- to pev drjpevriKov] Here 
again the recapitulation is not 



20<M2TH2. 



3, 0EAI. 'H^ ydp ovv. 

aK. T/;? to'lvvv uWaKTucr}? 8vo e\8r) Ae- 
yu>p.ev, to p.ev boop^TtKov, to Se tTipov dyopa- 

CTTLKOV J 

0EAI. Eip7]O-0CO. 

HE. Kai iatjv av (fyyaopeu dyopaaTLKi]v Stxfl T€fi- 
veaOai. 
d GEAI. IL7; 

HE. Tr)v peu twv avTOvpycov avTOTrcoXiKrjv Siai- 
povpevr)v, tt)v be toc aWoTpia eypa pL€Tafia\Xopevr)v 
p.eTafi\r)TLKr)v. 

GEAI. Udvv ye. 

HE. Ti Se ; rrjs fjL€T<x(3kr]TiKr)9 ov\ r\ pkv Kara 
ttoXlv dWayrj, a^eSou avTrjs ijpiav pepos 6i>, Ka.7n]- 
Xlktj Ti'poo-ayopeveTai ; 

GEAI. Nat. 



kind ol ac 
quisition 
we found 
bo be ex- 
change. 
Property ia 
exchanged 
l>y gift and 
5 by sale. 



The seller 
is either a 
io manufac- 
turer or a 
merchant. 



The mer- 
chant 
either re- 
tails or 
15 exports. 



quite exact : kttjtikt) was divided 

into perafShrjTiKov ( = dWaKTiKov) 
and x (l P COTlK ° 1 'i an d x fl P a>TlK0V 
into dycoviariKov and drjpevriKov. 

Supr. 219. 

3. to pev baprjTiKov] These 
words are suggested by 8a>po- 
(poptKov in the previous argu- 
ment ; the new discussion, as 
so often in Plato, taking colour 
from that which precedes. But 
cf. also supr. 219 d : /j.eTo/3X^n- 

kov ou did re Scopecov kul dyopdo-ecov. 
9. TrjV pev 8iaipavpevr}v\ 

" Those who make what they 
sell being distinguished as 
' producers.' " 

tS>v avrovpySiv] Those who 
manufacture what they sell. 
The word is used etymologi- 
cally. The usual meaning is, 
' one who farms his own land.' 



Cf. 



>\ Rep. 8, 565 a : tr/pos 



— ocroi avrovpyoi re kcii anpaypo- 
ves, ov ivdvv 7roAXa KeKTrjptvoi. 

9. diaipnvpevrjv (passive) an- 
swers better to the question jt/J 

((pr)0-0fj,ev TepveaBai) than b~iai- 

povpevoi, which is read only in 
two MSS. of inferior note, and 
appears in two others (n B) as 
a correction. 

11. peT(i(3\r]TiKr)v] This name 
was previously given to the 
whole class which is now called 

dWaKTIKT]. 

13. rfj? pfral3\T}TiKTJs K.r.A.] 
Cf. Ar. Pol. I. 4 : rr/s 8e pera- 
f3\T]TiK.rjs peyiarrov pev ip-rropia. 

1 4. o-^eSov — fjpto-v] And there- 
fore fit to form our next divi- 
sion. 

Ka'mj'kiKTj] The notion of retail 
business in Rep. 37 ib,c, iv avr% 
rfj ttoKci k. t. X. is more exact 
than here. Bodl. p.m. : tcdi n^Xi^. 



34 



TIAATQN02 



Now the 

export 

trader 

deals in 
food for 

the body 
or in food 
for the 
mind. 



HE. To 6V ye e£ aAA?;y eh akXi-jV irokiv 8iaA\ar- p. 229 
Topcevov (bvf) kcil Trpdaei epLiropiKi] ; 

GEAI. Ti 8 ov; 

2;E. Trj? 6° e/jLTTOpLKrj? up ovk fiaOijpeOa otl to 
'< fie'v, ocroi? to crtopa r pefeTai "j"j" Kexprjrat, to 8e, e 
ocroiy 77 'i'VXHi 7rcoAovv 8id vop.iorp.aTos aAAarrerai ; 

GEAI. rTcos* toDto Ae'yei? ; 

SE. To 7repi 7-7)1/ tyvxqv ureas dyvoovp.ev, «T€« to 
ye ercpov irov ^vviep.ev. 
» GEAI. No/. 

SE. Movo"i/O7i> re toLvvv ^vvdiraaav XeycopLeu, eVc 



I. SiaXXarrouei'Oi/] Prob. mid- 
dle voice, as p.eTafiaX\6p.€Vov 
supr., dWaTTerai infr. But per- 
haps passive, like dvatnrafievov 
and other words noticed above. 
dia signifies 'transmission,' as 
in Rep. i, 328 a : XapnaBia 
i'\ovTes 8ia8a)<T0V(Tiv dXXrjXois j 

5. Kexprjrai] Heindorf changed 
this into ko.1 xp*I™ without 
giving a reason. Stallbaum, 
who objects to this change, 
gives K.a\ Ke\pr}Tai, apparently 
taking this to be the MS. read- 
ing. Bekker : " <a\ XPV™ 
Heindorfius : libri Kexptfrai. n 
And so the Bodleian MS., viz. 

rpfCperai Kexpi)Tai. For the 
perfect, cf. Rep. 3, 409 c, Tim. 
65 e. The objection to this 
is that the seller cannot be 
said to use that which he 
sells. Stallbaum's reading is 
preferable, if Ke'xp»?rat be ren- 
dered " stands in need," sc. 
avrav, for which meaning see 
Legg. 4, 717 c. There is a 
similar difficulty about the 
reading of Euthyd. 289 a. 

8. dyvooi>p.ev — ^vvUptuJ The 



first pei-s. plur. is used with a 
kind of playful condescension, 
as in Theset. 210 b : rj ovv en 

Kvovfiev Tt Kai o>8ivopev, w (£iXe, 
fj Tvdvra eKreroKapev ; 

II. Mov<tikt]v — irapaax^v] A 
somewhat awkward sentence, 
where, as in supr. 219 b, ndv 
oirep k. t. X., the end does not 
seem to have been clearly seen 
from the beginning. The con- 
struction is, however, clear. 
" Speaking of all music, and 
painting, and juggling, and 
many other things which are 
carried about and sold, some 
for the delectation, and some 
for the serious purposes of the 
mind, let us say that when 
bought in one place and carried 
elsewhere to be sold, they give 
to him who carries and sells 
them, quite equally with the 
sale of food and drink, a just 
title to the name of merchant." 
Besides the general irregularity 
of the sentence, the concrete 
fjLovaiKT] — a3VT)6(l(ra is made 
parallel to the abstract a it lav 
— npdais. For the use of napi- 



20<M2TH2. 



35 



p. 224. 7ro\ecos iKaarore ei? ttoXiv tvOev peu d)vr)Oeicrav y 
CTepooae 8e dyo/xeprju koll 7ri7rpa<TKOfiei>r)v, Kai ypa(f)i- 
ktjv Kai 0au/j.aTO7rouKr}u kou 7roAAa erepa rrj? ^X^r, 
Ta fxev 7rapapvOla?, ra 8e Kai (T7rov8rjs X"-P ll> dyOtvra 
Kai 7rQ)Aovfiei>a, tov ayovra Ka\ ircaXovvTa pr)8ev 5 
tjttov rrj? tqjv aiTiwv Ka\ ttotwv Trpdo-ews epiropov 
opdats dv Xeyopevov irapacr^lv . 

0EAI. ' AXrjOeaTaTa Xeyeis. 
b SE. Ovkovv Ka\ tov fiaOyfiara £vv(ovovfj.€VOV 
irokiv re €K 7r6\€(09 vopla/JLaTOf dfulfiovTa ravrhv ic 
Trpoo-epei? ovofjta ; 

0EAI. ^(poSpaye. 

SE. T^s* 8rj y\rv\epTropLKri9 ravrrjs dp ov to fiev 



Xeiv, cf.Phaedr. 238 a: kcutovtcdv 
t3>v l8eS)v ennpeTrrjs 17 av rvxfi yevo- 
pevr/ TTjv avrrjs enavvpiav ovopa- 
£6pevov tov e'xovTa Trapexerai. In 
the mention of painting and 
juggling there is probably a 
tacit anticipation of pp. 234, 5, 
where the art of the Sophist 
is compared to both. For 
the two genitives ifrvxns napa- 
fiv6ias x<*p tv > cf. Rep. 7 > 5 2 5 c : 

ovk 0)1/775 ov8e npacrecos X^P lv ™ s 
ipiropovs f) Kairrjkovs pehercovTas, 
d\\' avrrjs rrjs ^fvxrjs, pqo-Ta>vr]s 
re p.eTao~Tpo<pT}s (sc. avTrjs) «r 
d\r)deidv re Kai ovaiav. 

9. padr/paTa f-vvav.] I. e. 

Buying knowledge from all 
quarters. 

10. TToXlV €K TToXeWs] "And 

exchanges them from one city 
to another for money." The 
former of the two prepositions 
is dropped, as in iEsch. Prom. 
682 : yrjv npb yrjs e'Xavvopai. 
Compare Polit. 289 e : to. re 

yetapyias <a\ ra to>v aWcov rexvaiv 

fpya 8iaKop.l£ovT(s or d\\rp\ovs 

F 



Kai avio-ovvres, 01 pep Kar ayopas 
ol 8e ttoKiv eK noKeas dWdrTovrts 
Kara 6d\ao-<rav <a\ ireQ, vopio~pd 
re Trpos raXXa Kai avro npos aiiro 
SiapeiftovTes. Heindorf renders 
in both passages, " exchanging 
one city for another." But in 
this case it. e. 77. vop. dp. could 
only mean " being induced by 
a money payment to change 
their abode," which is plainly 
not intended here. Hence 
Stallbaum's objection to vopio-- 

p.aros. In Apol. 37 d, aXKrjv 
e£ a'AAr?? noXeas dpeil3opti>a>, it 

is observable that the middle 
voice is used ; cf., however, 
Legg. 760 c. The meaning is 
the same as supr. 223 e : e'£ 

aXXrjs els aX\t]v 7ro\iv BiaXXaTTO- 
pevov &vt] Ka\ Trpdaei. 224 a : 
eV noXetos — els tto)uv — iwtpao-KO- 
pivqv. For \eyu>pev, cf. Theset. 
159 a: \eywpev df] epe re Kat 
tre Ka\ TaXX* fjHir) Kara tov avrov 
\6yov. 

13. T77SS17 — dvdyKr}] "Well, of 
this mental mex*chandize one 



And the 
trade in 
mental 



86 



riAATQNOS 



conducted 

either 
through 

fliHjiit'nl 
display, or 
tlie com- 
munication 
of points of 
learning. 
Ami the 
learning 
thus bar- 
tered may 
concern the 
arts, or 
virtue. 
The pur- 
veyor of 
arts may 
be called 
an art- 
seller: but 
what name 
is appli- 
cable to the 
seller of 
virtue ? 
The name 
of Sophist 
alone. 



(7ri8€iKTtKri StKaioTOLTa AeyoiT av, to Se yeXolov p.(v p. 114. 
oi>x i)ttov tov 7rp6(T0€v, o/aco? Se ixaOrjfxdriov ovaav 
irpdaiv avrr/v dSeXcjjco tlvl ttj? 7rpdtjecos ovopcaTi 
irpoaenreiv dvdyKt] ; 
5 0EAI. Yldvv pev ovv. 

HE. TavTr]9 tolvvv ttj9 p.a0r)fjLaTO7rcoXu<rj? to pev 
irep\ tol tcov aXXcov Te^ycov pa0rjp.aTa eWepcp, to 8e <; 
irep\ to t?}s dpeTrjs aXXco 7rpocrpr)Te'ov. 

0EAI. ITeS? yap ov ; 
10 HE. TeyyoirtoXiKov p.r/v to ye irepi rdAAa av 
appLOTTor to Se irep\ Tama av 7rpodvp.rj0i]TL Xeyeiv 
ovopa. 

0EAI. Kai tl Tis dv aXXo ovopca el7rcov ovk av 
TT\r\p.p.eXoir) ttXtjv to vvv tjpovpevov aiWo eivai to 
15 crofpLcrTiKOv yevos ; 

HE. OvSev aAAo. ffli vvv crvvaydytopLev avTO, 
AeyovTes d>9 to KTrjTiKrjs, pL€Tal3Ar)TiKrj9, dyopaaTiKrjs; 



kind might be most fairly term- 
ed the art of display : but there 
is another, which will sound 
no less oddly than the last, but 
yet, as dealing in learned ware, 
it must be called by some 
name which smacks of learn- 
ing." Heind. and Stallb. think 
that yeXoIoK applies to the 
name fiadrj^aToncoXtKrj as com- 
pared with -^vxefiTTopiKr], and 
suggest yeXoiw. The interpre- 
tation is probably right, but 
the emendation is unnecessary. 

(13.) \}fvx€finopiKris] The word 
calls up the same contemptible 
association which is contained 
in ^vxaycoyla. Compare also 
the expression of Soph. Antig. 
1063 : as (ifj efi.TTo\r]<T(ov tadi 
Trjv efxrjv (fipeva. 

7. ere pep — nXXw] For the 



variety, cf. Theset. 185 a : a 6Y 

krepas <Wd/ifco? aloOavei, dBvva- 
tou 6Y oXXt/s ravT aladeadai. 
alib. 

IO. TO TT€p\ TaW(l\ Cf. TO TT€p\ 

TrjV wXrjyrjv, SUpr. 22 1 b. 

av app.0TT0i\ Tvpoo-eiireiv niUSt 

be repeated in thought. 

14. aiiTo eivai] Pleonastic re- 
sumption. 

16. Ov8ev ciWoJ Sc. (Ittuv ovk 

av 7rXT]nne\olr]. In the follow- 
ing recapitulation fj,eTaP\r)TiKr} is 
again used for dXXanT iKrj, and the 
distinction between avronayXiKfi 
and dWaKTiKr) is omitted, al- 
though alluded to in the next 
sentence. 

17. p.eTap'KTiTiKris] Bodl. fieTa- 
(BXrjriKov, which is, however, 
probably taken from a few 
lines below. 



20M2TH2. 



37 



p. 224. IjJLiropiKris, ylrvyepiropLKiis irepi Xoyov? Kai pa6r)paTa 
dpeTrjs 7ra)XrjTiKov Sevrepov dve<pdvr/ cro<.j)L(JTiKr}. 

GEAI. MaXa ye. 

HE. 'YpiTOv Se y olpal ere, Kav e\ tis avrou 
KaOibpvpLevos ev 7roXei, ra p.ev wvoi>p.evos, to. 8e KC115 
TeKTaivopevos avTO? paOrjpara irep\ tol avra ravra 

KCU 7T&)AC0J>, €K TOVTOV TO tflV TTpOVTOL^aTO, KaXeiV 

ovSev dXXo ttXtjv hrrep vvv hr\. 
GEAI. Tt 8 ov fi€\\a> ; 

HE. Kai to KT7)TiKrj9 dpa p€Ta(3Ar)TiKOV, dyopa-10 
e o~tikov, Kanrr]\iK.ov elre avT07rcoXiKov, dptpoTepcos, o tl 

7T€p OLV fj 7T€pl TOL TOLCLVTO. pa07]/J.aTOTTCoXlKOV yeVO$, 

del av Trpoaepels, to? (fialvei, o~o<Picttik6v. 

GEAI. ' AvayKr}' rco yap Xoyco del crvvaKoXovOelv. 
HE. "Eri Or) crKO7rc0p,ei>, ei tivl Toiq>8e irpocreoiKev 15 
p. 225. apa to vvv pteTaSicoKopevov yevos. 
GEAI. Uolco 8rj ; 

HE. Tr}9 KTTjTlKrjs dyCOVLGTLKr) TL pepOS Tjplv TjV. 



4. Kav et tis avrov Ka6i8pv- 
(xevos iv TrdXet] The former de- 
finition included all the greater 
Sophists (including Zeno, see 
1 Ale. 119 a), this applies to 
some lesser lights, such as Anti- 
phon, and Damon the musician, 
perhaps to Antisthenes, though 
it is not certain that he taught 
for pay. Cf. Men. 92 b (Any- 

tlis' speech) : e'tre tis gevos eVt- 
X*ipri tolovtov ti noielv e'ire dcrros. 

5. ra 8e na\ reKTaivofievos] 
I.e. avrovpyos &>v rmv pad^pdrav. 

6. 7Tep\ ra avra. ravTa] Sc. 

to ttjs dpeTrjs : so also tt. to. 
ToiaiJTa infr. 

II. Kcmr]\iK6v ei're auro7TC»Xi- 
kov] This alternative is justi- 
fied by the words to. ph — 



The same 
is found tu 
apply, 
thirdly, to 

I he Iiihik 

merchant 

or nianu- 
faeturer 
of learned 
stores. 



avTos in the preceding sen- 
tence. Cf. Protag. 313 c : 

6 vo<pl(TTr)S epnopos Tis t] xci- 

7rjjXoy. The distinction between 

Ka7TT]XlKTj and aVTOTTCO^lKT] (&S B, 

pai't of p.eTaj3\T)TiKri) has been 
taught above, p. 223 d. 

13. as (paivei] Cf. Rep. 3, 389 
a : ovk dnodtKTeov Kara tov aov 
Xoyov. Et o~v, eCpTj, /3oi/Xei epov 
TiBivai, ov yap ovv 8rj dnodeKTe'ov. 

14. Xo'yw] Bodl. All. Xoyt/cw. 

This corruption is no doubt due 
to the frequency of the same 
termination in what precedes. 

18. dyayvio-TLKT)] Supr. 219 e. 

Distinguished from 6-qpevTiKr] 
as the violent from the secret 
mode of appropriation without 
contract. 



38 



nAATQNOS 



Once more, 
dividing 

violent 
conquest, 

which was 
a portion 
of acquisi- 
tive art, 
into emula- 
tion and 
contention: 
we see that 
bodily con- 
tention is 
the art of 
quelling 
by force. 
Logical 
contention, 
on the 
other hand, 
is the art 
of contro- 
versy. 



Contro- 
versy is 
either 
forensic, 
being held 
through 
long 

speeches in 
public on 



of right, 
or disputa- 
tious, con- 
sisting of 
short ques- 
tions and 
answers in 
private. 



GEAI. Hi> yap ovv. ]>. 

HE. OvK OL7TO TpOTTOV TOLVVV «OTi SlUipf'tV aVTTjV 

6Y X a. 

GEAI. Ka&' OTToia Ae'ye. 
5 HE. To p.lv a/AiAAr/TiKov avrr}? TiOevTav, to Se 
p.ayr]TiK.6v. 

GEAI. "Eo-tlv. 

SE. Tr]9 toivvv fia\r]TtKr)9 rw fiev acofiaTL irpos 
crcD/JuxTa yiyvopevco o~\(E^ov eiKos /ecu 7rpeirov bvopa 
io Xtyeiv tl tolovtov Tiflefievovs olov (3taaTLKov. 
GEAI. Noi. 

HE. Tc3 8e \6yoL9 TTpos \6yov? tl tls, d> Gecu- 
TrjTe, ctAAo thrr) irXrjv apL^ia^-qTrjTLKOV ; J> 

GEAI. Ovk'v. 
r? HE. To Se ye 7rep\ tols ap.(f)icr(3r)Tr]o-€i'? OeTe'ov 
Slttov. 

GEAI. Ufj; 

HE. Kac? ocrov fxev yap ylyveTat p.rjKeai re irpos 
IvavTia /xrjKr) Xoycov kou irep\ to. 8Uaia /ecu aSiKa 
20 8r)pocria, StKaviKov. 
GEAI. Nat. 



2. citto] So the Bodleian 
MS. here as in Theset. 143 c. 

5. T6 (iev apikXrjTtKov — to 8e 
paxqTiKov] Perhaps there is 
here the germ of the fine 
thought which is more fully 
expressed in Legg. 5, 731 a: 

(piXoveiKelra Se rjp.1v 7ra? irpbs 
dperrjV d<p66va>s. 6 pev yap toiovtos 
ras TToXeis av£ei, apiWtopevos fiev 
avTos, tuvs aWovs Be oi koXovoov 
BiaftoXals. Cf. Criti. 1 09 b : 
Oeoi — airaaav yr)v — BieXdy^avov, 
ov Kar epiv. 

9. ytyvopevco] Cf. SUpr. 2 20 e. 



I O. Xeyciv Ti6epevovs] A 

periphrasis for rldco-dai. " To 
use some s\ich name, assign- 
ing it." For Tideo-dai in this 
sense, cf. Theset. 157 c : <a — 
avdpwnov — rldevrai. 

1 2. \6yois 7rpos Xoyovs] Sc. 
yiyvopeva. 

1 8. Kad* 00-ov pev yap] yap not 

only answers the question, but, 
in doing so, gives a reason for 
the previous statement. 

19. Trepl ra BiKaia kq\ nSiKa] 

These words apply also to the 
next division. 



20<M2TH2. 



39 



HE. To 6" eV idiots au Kai KaraKeKeppaTta pivov 
epcdrrjaeai irpos onroKpiatis p.a>v eWur/xeOa kuXiiv 
dXXo 7rXrjv dvTtXoyiKov ; 

6EAI. Ov&v. 

J5?E. ToO 8e dvriXoyiKov to fiev, oaov Trepi rot 
^Vfi^oXaia a/JL(pLo-(3r]T€'LTai fxev, ukt} 8e kou ure^yois 
irep\ avTO wparreTai, raura Oereov p.tv eiSos, tirehrep 
avTO SieyvuiKev cos erepov ov 6 Xoyos, drap eiroovv- 
fxias ovff v7ro twv epnrpoaOev trvytv ovre vvv v(f) 
rjficou Tvyelv d^tov. 

0EAI. ' hXrfOrj' Kara crp.iKpd yap Xiav kou irav- 
ToBonra. SirjprjTai. 

SE. To 5e ye evre^yov, kou nepl SiKatcov avrcoi/ 
kou dSiKcav kou irepi tcov dXXwv bXcos apLcpiaft-qTovi', 
dp ouk epicrTLKov av Xiyetv eWurfieOa ; 



Of disputa- 
tious con- 
troversy, 
one kind is 
nameless, 
and does 
not deserve 
a name, 
when men 
higgle over 
1 contracts. 



Another 
and more 

systematic 
form of the 
15 same thing 
is when 



I. KaraKeKt ppar lapevov — ano- 
Kpurets] The construction fol- 
lows fii]K«Ti -rrpos ivavria fir]Krj 
Xnycov, by a sort of zeugma, 
since the dative (of the man- 
ner) is more natural with 71- 
yvopevov than KaraKeKep/jiaTKr- 
ptvov. 

5. Toy 8e dvTi\oyiKov — o\r/pJ7- 

t<h] " Now of controversy that 
which consists of disputes about 
contracts, conducted in a ran- 
dom artless way, must indeed 
be distinguished as a separate 
kind, since our dialectic per- 
ceives in it a determinate cha- 
racter, but, as it has never yet 
been named, so it is not worth 
while for us now to name it." 
" True ; the fragments into 
which it is divided are too 
small and heterogeneous for 
this." 7rai/ro6a7rd is not exactly 
in construction with Xlav, but 
is an expansion of crpixpa. 



ocrov — dp(pia-j3r]Te'iTai pev] The 
action of the verb becomes the 
subject of the passive form, 

as in yiyvopevov, avaa-nu>nevov, 

&c, supra. Compare Soph. 

Trach. 167 : TOiai>T e(pa(rKe 
npos 6c<ou eipappiva tu>v 'Hpa- 
icKdcov (KTeXtVTciadai irovuv. 

6. dre^vas] Bodl. arexfajy. 

7. 7rparT6rai is impersonal. 

8. encouvpias] Modern poli- 
tical economy has supplied the 
missing term, viz. " higgling 
in the market," except that the 
word gvpPoXaia extends to 
other contracts besides those 
of commerce, including every 
private matter of dispute, how- 
ever trifling. 

13. Kai ntpl BiKaicov avronv Km 
dSiKwv Kal nepl tcov ciXXoov oAws] 
Compare Theset. 175b: orav — 
ideXrja-Tj — iKJUrjvai (K tou ti tyoj 
ae ddiKO) 7 rl ail ept (Is aKerf/iu 
avTrjs SiKaivavvrjs T( Kal ddiKias, 



40 



11AATQN02 



men argue 
• aecundem 
artem" on 
general 
principles 
of right. 
This is 
Eristic, 
which may 
either 
waste the 
talker's 
substance 
and the 
hearers' 
patience, 
when it is 
mere loqua- 
city, or 
may make 
a gain of 
disputa- 
tion, in 
which case, 
what is 
its right 
name ? 



This won- 
derful So- 
phist has 
turned up 
a fourth 
time. 



GEAI. Yla><i yap ov ; p. 

SE. Tov pcyv ipicTTLKOv to pcev ^piyxaTO^OopLKov , J 
to Se yjpT)\xa.TiOTiKOV ov Tvyyavei. 

0EAI. YlavTairaai ye. 
5 SE. Tyv eiraivvpiav tolvvv, iqv eKUTepov del KaXeiv 
uvtcov, iretpaOcdpev elireiv. 

GEAI. Ovkovv XPV- 

SE. Aokco fJLrju to ye 81 ifiovrjv tyjs irepi Tama 
SiaTpifBrj? afxeXes tcov OLKelov yiyvopevov, irepi Se 

IOTYJV Xe^lV Tols 7T0AA0i? TCOV UKOVOVTCOV ov pied' 

rjdovrj? aKovofxevov, KaXelaOai Kara yvcopr/v ti)v ifirjv 
oi>x eWepov d8oXeo~)^iKov . 

GEAI. AeyeTai yap ovv ovtco 7rcos. 

HE. Tovtov TOivvv TovvavTiov, diro tcov ISlcotlkcov c 
15 epidcov xprjjAaTilppevov, ev tco p.epeu av ireipco vvv 
threw. 

GEAI. Kal tis dv av elircov e\epov ovk e^aptdpTOi 
7rXrjv ye tov 6avp.ao~Tov irdXiv eKeivov rJKeiv av 



k.t.X. For oXcoy (referring to 
avT&v = in a universal manner, 

opposed to Kara apiKpa Kal nav- 
ToSana), cf. ib. 1 74 a: (pvo-iv 
e'pevvaipe'vrj t5>v ovtcov eKaarov 

ciXov. The Sophist's art is 
now described as bearing the 
semblance of philosophy, and as 
being engaged with the same 
class of questions. 

8. to ye Si' rjdovrjs — d8oXeo~)(i- 
kov] It is possible that the 
work of Socrates is here ironi- 
cally described as ' chremato- 
phthoric,' whereas that of the 
Sophist is ' chrematistic' Com- 
pare Polit. 299 c, where in 
the state which is jealous of 
the laws the ture statesman or 
philosopher is said to be called 



by his fellow-citizens dSoAeo-^y 

TIS (TO(pLO-TT]S. 

9. wept Se ttjv Xei-tv — aKovope- 
vov] These words are inserted 
in order to indicate the deri- 
vation of dSoXeo-x^y, quasi d^Sr/s 

ttj Xe£ei. 

18. Trakiv — r\t<.eiv\ Cf. Theset. 

196 bl els tovs avTOvs dvi)Kei 

Xoyovs. Cf. Legg. 3, 683 a : 

TeTl'ipTTj TIS 7]Kei 7ToXlS KdTOlKl^O- 

pevrj. Cf. 7*4 c • nd-Xiv rjplv 
dpcfua^TjTovpevov eXr]Xv6ev. Hip- 
parch. 232 a : irdXtv Tplrov rj 
TeTciprov i)Kei Tjpiv opoXoyovpevov. 

The conjecture of Heindorf, Km 
t'i tis av, although supported 1 >y 
the analogy of p. 224 c, km t[ 

tis av aXXo ovopa elncov ovk av 

TrXrjppeXotr), to which av clearly 



20M2TH2. 



41 



226. VVV TCTCtpTOV TOV fXiTabnOKOjJieVOU V(Jj r)/J.(t)l> <r<>- 

<pi(TTr)i>. 

SE. OvSeu aAA' ?; to xP 1 ll JiaTL(JTLK0V 7 e ^°fj <*>>> 

€OLK€V, epL(TTLKr)S OV T€)^V1]?, TTjS GlVTiAoyiKr]?, T>/S" 

d/j,(pL(r(3r]Tr)TiKr}?, tt}? fiaymTtia}?, rrj? dyoovtaTiKr)?, 5 
7-179 KTTjTiKrj? ecTTLV, go? 6 Xoyo? au jie/ir]i>vK€ vvv, 6 

<TO(f)l(TTr)?. 

0EAI. KofjuSf) f±lv ow. 

HE. Opa.9 ovv 009 dXTjOrj Xeyerai to ttolklXov 
tivai tovto to Or/plov, koll to Xeyo/ievov ov Tjj eTe'pa. k 
XtjittIov ; 

0EAI. Ovkovv dptyolv xpr]. 

HE. Xpr) yap ovv, /cat /caret 8vva/xiv ye ovtco 
b 7roi7]T€Oi>, ToiovSe tl pieTaOeovTas i^yo? avTov. /cat 



refers, is not absolutely ne- 
cessary or certain. 

i. t6v om. Bodl. An. The 
omission is probably due to 
the 6[ioioTe\evTov rather than, 
as Stallbaum imagined, to 
conjecture : although the in- 
telligibleness of the phrase r<f- 

Taprov rjKei peTadicoKopevov may 

have assisted the error. 

3. to xp?7/iar£<7TiK6f] His ge- 
nealogy is this time traced 
backwards for the sake of va- 
riety. Cf. infr. 268 c : apxopevov 
aivb TeXevrrjs. 

4. ipiOTLKrjs ov T(X vr l^\ The 
insertion of pleonastic words, 
such as ov in this place, be- 
longs to the peculiar style 
which Plato has chosen to 
adopt. 

9. aKr}6rj Xeyerai to] Cf. 
Men. 98 b: KCU tovto fioi 80- 
Kels dA?7#»7 Xeyfiv. Lach. 1 86 a : 
k<i\ tovto pev a\T)8rj Xeyeis. The 

form dXrjdri Xe'yeis was so fre- 
quent that the plural predicate 



is retained even with a singular 
subject. Cf. i. Ale. 109 c : 

7T/30S tcivt cipa TO hiKaiov. 

iroiKikov\ Supr. 223 b, iv paka 
TToiKiXrjs. 

10. to Srjpinv] The image of 
the hunt for the Sophist, which 
was cautiously introduced in 
p. 218 c, is here advanced 
somewhat more boldly. 

ov Tjj eTepa \rjTTTeov\ " Not 

to be caught with one hand." 
This very natural expression, 
and indeed the colour of the 
whole passage, is destroyed by 
Stallbaum, who says that ov t[ } 
eV. X. is a boxing phrase. If it 
were so, there would be an in- 
tolerable confusion of metaphors 
in what follows. 

14. Toi6v8e peTaOeoi'Tcis t'^i'os 

avTov] We have tried every 
path which we had opened in 
searching for the angler, and 
the Sophist is not yet taken. 
He is not to be caught with 
one hand, we must use both : 



His wiles 
arc mani- 
fold, and 

so must 
be our en- 
deavours. 
There is a 
trace of 
him which 
we have 
not yet 
examined. 



42 



riAATQNOS 



Our house- 
hold ser- 
vants talk, 
and bo do 
we, of sit't- 
ing, rinsing 
Bcouring, 
straining 
wringing 



/jlol Xeye' ro>v oik^tlkow ovoparcov KaXovfMP arra \>- Z2M 



Also of 
combing, 
carding, 
warping, 

and the 
like. 



7T0V ; 

0EAI. Kal woXXa' drap irola 67; rol>i> ttoXXcov 
Trvv6av€L ; 
: 5 HE. Td roiaSe, olov SiyOeiv re Xeyopcev kol diar- 
rav kol ftpdrreiv Kou •fdtaKpli/ewf . 

9EAI. Tlfirjv; 

SE. Kal irpos ye rouroi? en. j-aiveiv, Kardyeiu, 
KepKiteiv, kcu pivpia ev reus reyyaLS dXXa rotavra 
o evovra eiuardp.e6a. rj yap ; 

0EAI. To iroLOv avrcov irepi (3ovXr/0ei9 SrjXwcrai, 
7rapa8elyp.ara wpoOels 1 ravra Kara iravrov rjpov ; 

£?E. /\iaiperiKa wov to. Xe^Oevra e'lprjrai ^vp.- 
iravra. 
5 0EAI. Nat. 

S*E. Kara rov ep.ov to'lvvv Xoyov coy irep\ ravra 



in other words, we must 
try another and independent 
track. This " new scent," how- 
ever, is not wholly uncon- 
nected with those previously 
followed. For the notion of 
the Elenchus, which is the 
characteristic now to be set 
up, has been suggested by the 
mention of avTikoyiKrj. 

I . Tmv oikctikcov oz/o/xaYcw] 

Throughout these dialogues, 
by an exaggeration of the cy- 
nical irony of Socrates, not 
without a true feeling of the 
universality of science, the 
highest thoughts are illustrated 
by the lowest images. 

Tav olKeriKcov — wov ;] " There 
are some words in use amongst 
our menials to which we give 
currency, I presume ?" 

5. Xeyofitv] Note the intro- 



duction of a fresh verb, re- 
suming KaXovptv. 

6. Kal iSiaKpiveivi] Unless Bia- 
Kpiveiv (or SiaKifeiw(l), to "shake 
up," cf. Ar. Nub. 477) was 
used in some special technical 
sense, the word occurs strangely 
here, and awkwardly antici- 
pates what follows. " Itaque 
ni, quod parum probabile, ab 
aliena manu asserta hsec Kal 
SiaKpiveiv putentur, in verbo 
SiaKplveiv aliud videtur delitu- 
isse, quod felicior aliquando 
conjector reperiet." Heind. 

16. cos — Texvrjv] Cf. Phileb. 
18 C : fiiav eV avroly cos ovcrav 
ypappariKTjv rtx vr ) v «re<£#e'y|aTO 
irpocrenrcbv. re^vr/v is resumed 

by avTTjv for the sake of clear- 
ness, as in Theset. 155 d : dvbpCav 
— nvTcbv. alib. 



KXM2TH2. 



43 



p. 226. jaIolv ovaav eV airaai re^yr]v, evbs ovofiaTos afjiw- 
aofiev avrrjv. 

0EAI. Tiva irpocrenrovTes ; 
HE. AiaKpLTiKrjv. 
0EAI. "Eoro). 

HE. 2/C07T6t 5?) TOLVT1]? OLV &VO OLV 7TT) 8vP(OfJ.€$a 

KOLTibelv e'ldrj. 

0EAI. Tayeiav toy efiol (TKe^Lu eir it arrets. 
d SE. Kal firjv ev ye reus elpypcevais SiaKplaecn rh 
fiev yeipov a.7ro fieXrlovos airoywpl^eiv rjv, to $' 
Ofioiov a0' opolov. 

0EAI. ^ye&ov ovto) vvv \ey6ev (palverai. 

HE. T^s* p.€v Toivvv 6vop.a ovk e^co Xeyop.evov' 



All Hi.- 
are in 



ol 

dividing; 
but while 

in tliosi- 
last men- 
tioned like 
is divided 
from like, 
iii the for- 
mer the 
good is 
separated 
from the 



4. AiaKpiTLKTjv] Cf. Polit. 
282 b : peyaka Tive Kara iravra 
fjpiv tj(TTr}V re^va, 17 crvyKpiTiKr] re 

Kal 8ia<piTiKr]. There is here 
brought into distinct promi- 
nence the idea of Difference, 
(suggested by that of Contro- 
versy), on which the discussion 
in this dialogue chiefly turns. 

8. as e/xoi] Cf. Rep. 536 c, 
d : ovkovv cos y 6/101 ciKpoaTfj. 
S AXX' ws e'/ioi, tjv 0° iyco, prjropi. 
Soph. Aj. 395 : epc-fios Si cpaev- 
vorarov, as e'/iot. For the 

meaning of KepK^eiv, which is 
not clearly given in the Lexi- 
cons, see Cratyl. 388 a : Kep- 

Ki£ovres Se tl dpcopev ; ov ttjv 
KpoKfjv Km tovs CTTrjpovas crvyKe- 
\vpevovs BiaKp'ivopev ; It seems 
to have been a process, not 
merely of making fast, but of 
giving a regular appearance 
to the web by means of the 
comb or KepKis. See Smith's 
Dictionary of Antiquities, art. 
Tela, p. 1101 b. 



9. ev ye — 6/10101/j " In the 
separations above named we 
saw included the parting of 
worse from better and of like 
from like." The past tense 
implies an appeal to experi- 
ence. For the limitation of the 
inference by means of ye, cf. 

Theset- 204 C : ev ye Tois 6cr a e£ 
apidpov earl. 

to /ieV] E. g. birj6e7v, 8iar- 
rav, (ipaTTeiv. 

1 0. to Se] E. g. ^alveiv, KaTa- 
yeiv, Kepul^eiv. 

12. 2xebov — (palverai] "Such 
does appear to be the case now 
you have put it into words." 
uvtco is to be joined with cpai- 
verai. For Xexdev, cf. the Ho- 
meric pex&£ v Se re vl]TTios eyvco. 
Rep. 2, 370 b I evvoco yap kcu aii- 
tos elrrovros crov. Phileb. 1 4 C : 
Savpacrrov \e\dev. Legg. 2, 672 
b : 81a to KciKcos tovs avQpcoivovs 
avTO VTro\a(3e1v Kal yvcovai \e%6ev. 

Phileb. 45 b : vvv prjBev (pat- 



44 



IIAATQN02 



To do 

this is to 
purify. 
.Vinl then 
axe two 
sorts of 
purifica- 



First of 
bodies, 
whether 

animate or 
inanimate, 
there are 
purgations 
both in- 
ternal and 
external. 



tt}? 8e KaTaXeiirovar}? pev to ftekriov diaKplaea)?, to p. 226. 
8e yelpov uTrofiaXXovo-rj? ^w. 

BEAI. Aeye tl. 

SE. Ylaaa 1) rotavrr] SiaKpicn?, &)$• eyio tjvvvoco, 
5 XeyeTai irapa ttolvtoov nadappos T19. 

0EAI. Aeyerat yap ovv. 

S?E. Ovkovv to ye KaQapTiKOv ei8o? av 8l7tXovi> e 
cw Tray av \8oi ; 

0EAI. N«/, Kara crypXiqv ye 'law ov p.i]v eycoye 
\oKaOopco vvv. 

aE. Kai ixrjv Ta Trepl Ta acofiaTa iroXXa e?8r] 
KO-Odpaecav evl irepiXafielv bvop.aTi irpocrrjKei. 

0EAI. Yiola KOI tlvl ; 

£JE. Ta Te tcov (cocav, ocra £vtos acopLaTcov viro 
ir,yvfxuao~TiKi]^ larpiKYji- Te opOoos 8taKpivo\xeva KaOal- p. 227. 
peTai Ka\ irepi tolktos, threw p.ev tyavXa, ocra (3aXa- 



4. as eyw £vvvoa>\ " As I 

perceive ou taking a general 
survey :" i. e. by a process of 

ovvayayr). 'O yap (twotttlkos 
StaXeKTiKos. (Rep. 7, 537 C.) 

5. Ka.6apiJ.6s rts] The thought 
which is here introduced, that 
philosophy is a purification of 
the soul, has an affinity with 
Pythagorean doctrine, and is 
in harmony with the Phsedo. 
The same idea is applied to the 
science of government in the 
Politicus, 293 d. Cf. also Legg. 
5,735. tis marks the introduc- 
tion of a fresh notion. Cf. Polit. 

299 c: els 8rj ti hiKa<TTT)piov. 

II. 7roXXa] Sc. ovra. 

I 2. Kadapcremv] " processes of 
cleansing." For the variation of 
the word, cf. Legg. 9, 868 c, d : 

Kaddpaeis Kadappovs, ib. 735 c - 

14. Ta. re t5>v £d>a>v — icadal- 



perai] " I mean both cleans- 
ings of living bodies, including 
such right separations and pur- 
gations as are effected within." 

15. tiaKpivopeva] Compare 
Phileb. 46 e : tS> to. o-vyKeKpi- 
piva /3('a 8ia\fiv r\ to. bianeKpipeva 
trvyxelv. Ar. Eth. Nic. VII. 1 4, 
§ 6 : 01 8e p(\ay)(okiKoi Trp> (pvcriu 
del biovrat larpeias Kal to crcopa 
8aKvopevov SiareXeZrat 81a tt/v 

Kpao-iv, where similar physio- 
logical notions are implied. 

16. 7repi tclkt6s\ Sc. KaBaipo- 

ptva. The notion of e'i8rj is 
not distinctly repeated with 
So-a, which is the cognate sub- 
ject (in apposition to the ac- 
tion) of 8iaKpivopeva Kadalperai. 
I. e. ocra 8. k. = oo~ai 8iaicpio-eis 
re Kal Kadappo\ yiyvovrai. 

elnew pev fpavka] Sc. ei8os 8e. 
e\ovTa 6pa>s. 



20<M2TH2. 



45 



p. 227. vevTLKii Trapi^erai' Kai tu>v d\j/v)(a)V acofiarcou, <l)v 
yvctffievTiKT) kgu ^ypunaaa Koa/xrjTiKi) tyjv tTTifitXtLav 
7rape)(0/xei>rj /caret afiiKpa 7roAAa kcil yeXoia Sokovptu 
6v6f.1a.Ta eaytv. 

0EAI. MaXaye. 5 

£?E. YlavTa-naai jiev ovv, co QeaiTr)T6. aAAct yap 



2. yvacpevriKr] Kai £vpircura ko- 

<rnrjTiKT)] It is implied that 
yvafavTLKr], cloth-dressing, is a 
department of Koup-qTiKt], the art 
of making neat. This is dis- 
tinctly affirmed in Polit. 282 a: 

ttoXX?^s~ ovarjs tj)? KoaprjTLKrjs rovv- 
Tauda avTTJs popiov (Ikos nepikap.- 
(Bdveiv KvaCpevTtKrj. The WOrd 

Koa-ixrjTiKrj is not found elsewhere 
in this sense, and Dr. Badham, 
following the analogy of Valck- 
naer's correction (?) of Hdt.VII. 
209 (ras KecpaKas [ko]<t piovrai) , 
would prefer a-p?™*?/. But it 
should be borne in mind that 
" washing " and " darning " 
(TrXvvTiKr] Kai aneaTiKT), Polit. I.e.) 
are included in the art in ques- 
tion. " Kenovation" is not 
quite an equivalent, because 
KoaprjTiKri implies dressing or 
" brushing up" the new clothes 
as well as the old. 

ttjv inipfKeiav Trape^o/ue'vi/ Kara 

a-piKpa] " Attending to which 
things in a variety of minute 
departments, the processes of 
fulling and other furbishing 
have earned a great number of 
what are thought ridiculous 
names." 

3. ye\o7a Sokovvto] " Which 
are thought ridiculous," — since 
no name really is so which con- 
veys a genuine meaning. Cf. 
Rep. 7, 538 b : oIkclovs Sokovv- 
ras. Thcset. 153 a: to — dvai 



8okovi>. Ibid. 176 d: Seu/oV^rts 
toKovam. And compare Legg. 

7, 799 d • 7i"oXXa Kai apiKpa 
SoKovvTa thai vopipa. 

4. ea-x ev ] Cf. Rep. 6, 502 d : 

tTTfitrj ravra poyis riXos tcr)(fV. 

6. Havranao-i ptv ovv] "There 
can be no doubt of their 
being thought absurd. But 
then, Theretetus, the spirit of 
method cares neither more 
nor less for sponging than for 
physicking, if it be so that 
the one does us small service 
and the other great in the 
way of purifying. For her 
endeavour is to know what is 
and is not kindred in the whole 
range of the sciences and arts ; 
wherefore she pays equal ob- 
servance to them all, and where 
she finds resemblance between 
things, she counts the one no 
whit more ridiculous than the 
other ; nor does she esteem 
him who gives generalship as 
an instance of "pursuit" at all 
more decorous but as a rule 
rather more affected than one 
who prefers the example of 
vermin-killing." For the verb 
o-noyyifa, see Dem. de Cor. 313. 
12 ; Aristoph. Thesm. 247. 
This clause refers to the many 
minute branches of KoaprjTiKr] 
of which (T7ToyyiaTiKTj is one, 
rather than to the cktos <a6ap- 

(TtlS TG)V &OCOJ/. 



(This occa- 
sions the 
remark 



40 



IJAATQNOS 



thai bci- 
entific 
method 
ignores the 
common 
standards 
of mean 
and high.) 



Tjj tcou Xoycov fx(0u8o) iTTroyyioTiK^s i] (f)apfxaK07ro- p 
(Tias ovfttv i)Ttqv ou8e tl pdXXov rvy)(ai>€i /xeAoi>, el 
to fj.€i> (TfjiiKpd, rh 8e p.eyd\a tj/jlos cof/jeAet KaOrxipov. 
tov KTycraaOai yap eveKa vovv iraawv Ttyywv to b 
5 ijvyyeves kou to fir) ^vyyeves KOLTavoelv Treipajfuevrj 
ti/ulu Trpos tovto i£ 'ictov 7rdcra?, /cat Oarepa twv 
irepcov kclto, tyjv bp.oioTr\Ta ovhlv rjyeiTOU yeXoioTepa, 
aepLVOTepov Se tl tov Sid aTpaTTjyiK^y ?) (f)6eipicrTiKr}s 
8r)\ovvTa 6-qpevTLK.rjV ov8ei> vevopaKev, aAA' a>? to 



1 . o-noyyurrLKris] " The art 

of cleansing with the sponge." 
dX\a ydp implies, " But the 
apparent absurdity of the 
names is nothing to us, for," 
&c. 

2. ov8e Tl paWov] Cf. Rep. 
I, 339 b : ovira 8rj~kov ovS" el 

peydXyj. From a humorous 
determination to be strictly 
impartial, it is purposely left 
doubtful which is to be con- 
sidered the more useful art. 
Plato seems to have changed 
his opinion on the subject of 
pharmacy. Compare Rep. 3, 
407 with Tim. 89 c, d. 

4. tov KTrjcracrdai evexa vovv] 
Compare Polit. 272 c : irvvda- 

vopevoi napa ndo~r]s <fivo~ecos ei 
two. Tts I8iav 8vvapiv e^ovaa 
fjcrdeTO ti 8td(popov Tav aXXcov 
els avvayvppbv <fipovr)0~eoos. 

to avyyeves Kai to prj crvy- 
yeves] Cf.Rep. 7,531 C : iav pev 
em Trjv aXXrjXcov koivcdvlciv a(piKr]- 
Tai Kai avyyeveiav, Kai avWoyurdj} 
ravra fi icrTiv dXKrjXois olKela, (pe- 
peiv ti avTcov els a ftovXopeda ttjv 
TvpaypaTelav, Kai ovk dvovijTa iro- 
velaBai, el 8e prj, dvovrjTa. 

7. KaTO. TT)V OpOlOTTjTa] I. e. 

fj ToiavTa io-Ti. " In respect of 
their resemblance," — to which 



in the act of generalizing her 
attention is confined. 

8. o-epvoTepov] " More decor- 
ous or refined." Cf. Theset. 

1 50 a : (pevyovai Kai ttjv jrpopvr]- 
CTTiKrjV are aepvai ovaai ai palai. 

Compare Parm. 130c: ore oi8ev 
amwv aTipdo-eis. Phileb. 58 C, 

Phsedr. 261 b. Polit, 266 d : 

o ti tt) TOia8e pe668a> tcov \6ya>v 
ovTe aepvoTepov pakXov epe^rjo-ev 

r) p^j. It is a true reflection, 
though here ironically applied, 
that science ignores the fasti- 
diousness of the senses and the 
prejudices of a refined taste, 
and, as Lord Bacon says, 
" iEque palatia et cloacas in- 
greditur nee tamen polluitur." 
Nov. Organ. 1, 120. Compare 
also the defiance of ridicule in 
Rep. 5, 452. And see the re- 
marks of Mr. Grote on the pas- 
sage of the Parmenides above 
cited, Plato &c, vol. ii. p. 268. 
tl — ov8ev] Cf. Pha?d. 74 a: 

oiS' oXXo Tl TQ)V TOIOVTCOV Ol)8£v. 

9. BrjpevTiKTjv] Plato seems 
to have been fond of the no- 
tion of a science of 6rjpevTi<rj 
which should include war, ty- 
ranny, the chase, rhetoric, and 
sophistry under one head. Cf. 
supr. p. 222, Euthyd. 290 b, 



20M2TH2. 



47 



p. 227. 7roXv yavvoTtpov . kcu 8rj kcu vvv, onep rfpov, tl 
irpoorepovpev ovopa ^vpTrdcras SvvdptLs, oarat atop.a 
e'/re epL\\rvypv e'/re axj/vxoi' ^dXrj^aau^ KaOaipeiv, ov8eu 
c avrfj diolcrei, iroiov tl Ae)(0ei> tvirpeTrecrTaTov eluai 
So^eC fiovov i)(€Tco ^W/Ois" tcov Trjs ^vyr)? KaOdpaewu 5 
■ndvTO. £vv§r}(rav ocra aAAo tl Kadalpei rov yap 
7rep\ tt]v hidvotav KtxOappov diro tcou dXKcov tiriKt- 
)(etpr)K€i> d(f)opicra(70ai ra vvv, ei ye oirep /3oi>Aerou 
pavOdvopev. 

GEAI. 'AAAa pepdOrjKa, kcu avyywpw Svo p.ev 10 
eldr] KtxOdpcrem, ev Se to irep\ T-qv ^v)q~\v eldos elvau, 
tov irep\ to acopa x^pts ou. 

HE. YIdi>TGL>i> KaWiaTa. koii pot to peTtx 



Polit. 299 d, Rep. 2, 373 b, 
Legg. 7, 823 ; see also Epin. 
975 c. 

1. onep rjpov] Supr. 226 e: 
7roia kcu tivi. "And so now, 
with respect to the question 
you have asked, What name is 
to be given to all faculties 
whose province is to cleanse 
animate or inanimate bodies, 
she will not care, what expres- 
sion will sound most seemly." 
t'i ivpoo-ep. is explanatory of onep, 
whose antecedent is in the ac- 
cusative of respect after cWo-«. 
ovBiv is adverbial, and the 
subj. of Siotaei is the clause 

TTOIOV Tl t)6£;€l. 

3. felXrjCpaaif ] So all the 
MSS. except a corrector of Par. 
B.,who gives el\r)x a0 ~ L (thus, d\rj- 

cpacn). Although it is difficult 
to bring forward another in- 
stance of Xapl3dv(o used exactly 
in this sense, or followed by 
an infinitive, it is not quite 



certain that elXrjcpao-i here is 
wrong. Cf. Legg. 1, 624 a: 
t'i\7](pe ttjv alriav. lb. 6, 768 d : 
ttjv Tr\ei(TTr]P vopndeaiav elXrjcpaai. 

Hdt. IIL71. See also Phileb. 
37 b, and the Zurich Editors' 
preface to the Philebus, p. xiv. 
There is, however, a much 
greater internal probability in 
favour of elXi^xao-i. Cf. Thea?t. 

I49 b : ttjv ~Xo%eiav e'lXrj^f. 
Tim. 5 2 a: tovto b 8tj vorjcris 

c'lXlJXfV eTTlCTKOTTflv. lb. 38 d: Tt]V 

ivavTiav elk-qxbs avr<o bvvap.iv. 

5. c^ero)] Sc. to Aex#eV ovopa. 
Cf. Rep. 7,533 e: fori 8', as efjLol 
SokcZ, ov nep\ ovopaTos cipcpio-fti]- 

TTJO-IS, oh TOaOVTCOV TVipl aKC\JMS 

oo-oji/ fjpiv TrpoKeirai. Oil yap 
ovv, ecprj' aXA' o civ povov S77X0T 
irpbs ttjv egiv Q-aCpTjvciq, a Ae'yci 
iv tyvxri. 

7. eniKextiprjKev] Sc. fj tcov 
"Koycov Tex vr l- 

IO. 8vo — Kaddpaecos] eivai 

must be supplied from the 
folio wins: clause. 



Secondly, 
there are 
purifica- 
tions of 
the mind, 
whereby 
the evil is 
separated 
from the 
good. 



48 



[IAATQN02 



TOVTO tTTUKOVe 7T€Ll 



ipco/J.evo<> av TO \t\QfV Si)(rj p. 

T€fXV€lV. 

BE A I. KaO* oiroV av v(j)i]yr}, 7reipa.o-op.ai croi 
avvTepiveiv- 
5 HE. Ylovtjplav krepov uperi]9 ev "^v)(rj Xeyo/iev 
ti ; 

0EAI. ricos" yap ov ; 

SE. Kai fJLrjv KaOap/xo? rjv to XnreTv fiev #«Ye- 
pov, €K(3dAA€ii> 8e ocrov av r) irov ti (pXavpov. 
io 0EAI. 'Hv yap ovv. e 

iHE. Kai yj/vxr}? apa Kaff oo~ov av evplcrKcofjiev 
KaKias d(palp€o-iv Tiva, Kadapfxov avTOv XeyovTeg ip 
pLeAci <p0€ytj6fi€0a. 

0EAI. Kal fiaXa ye. 
Now men- 15 HE. Auo fiev e'ISr) KaKia? irep\ \^v)(r}v pryriov. 

tal evils „ 

are of two WJiAl. II Ota; 

kinds, cor- ^_ v v ^ , , , v 

responding All.. 10 /XC^ OiO^ VOCTOV €V CTGO/JLaTL, TO O 0L0V P« 

andugii- alaxo? iyyiyvo^evov. 

ness in the AT , . T r ^. > ,/ ,, 

body: (3EA1. (Ju/c e\xadov. 



I. enaKove TTtipaipevos] Bad- 
ham elegantly conjectures eira- 
KoXouOei : and, less happily, 
Treipaptvco. Cf. Polit. 26 1 a : 
dW £naKo\ov6a>v avvrepve. See 

however Legg. 900 d : «ai o-$o- 

8pa -ye eVijKoue. it). 905 d. 
5. aper^s] Bodl. (ip rrjs. 

8. X«reu/] So all the MSS. 
" To leave once for all what is 
not evil, but continually to 
throw out Avhatever evil is 
found anywhere." So the dif- 
ference of tense may be ex- 
pressed. The action of Xcrrdv 
is viewed as final, that of eK/3dX- 
Xeiv as continuous. Heind. conj. 
Xeineiv. 



9. nov] " anywhei'e." I. e. (in 
the present instance) " in any 
region of the soul." 

II. ^v^y] Gen. after KaKi'ay 
d(paipeaiv and ica.9app.6v. Cf. 
supr. 224 a and note. 

I 2. avrbv refers to d(paip€(Tiv, 

but agrees in gender by at- 
traction with Kadappov. 

iv p,e\,i\ Cf. Phileb. 28 

b : iva pr] — napa /xe'Xor (pdey^ai- 

ne6d ti. " In tune," i. e. con- 
sistently. 

15. Auo jtev e'lSt] Kaicias] The 
implied apodosis, which is 
postponed by the explanation 

which follows, is 8vo 8e KaBappwv. 
18. iyytyvoptvov] Sc. iv tyvxfj. 



20M2TH2. 



49 



228. HE. Nocrov tcrays koll aracnv ov tolvtov vevo- 

fllKOLS. 

0EAI. Ovdi av npos tovto eyco tl \pi'j p.e diro- 
KpivaaOai. 

HE. YloTepov aXXo tl ardaii/ yyovptevo? y ttjv 5 
tov (frvaei Ijvyyevov? e/c tlvos 8ia(popa? 8ia<jj0opdv; 

GEAI. Ov8ev. 

SE. 'AAA' auryps aXXo tl wXrjv to ttjs ufAeTpias 
iravTaypv SvaeiSes ov ye'vo?; 
b 6EAI. OvSafias aAAo. to 

HE. TV 8e; iv yj/vxi) 86tja? eniOvfilais koll Ov/jlov 
■qftovcus koll Xoyov XviraL? koll wdvTa dXXrjXois touto. 
tcov (j)Xavpo)? ixovTQjv ovk fjaO^fieOa 8La(pepopeva ; 

0EAI. Kal a(j)68pa ye. 

HE. Evyyevrj ye firjv ef apdyicrjs ^vprnavTa ye- 15 
yovev. 

GEAI. Y\m yap ov; 

HE. ^TLXCFLV dpa KOLL VOCTOV TYjS ^V\rjs TTOVrjpLOLV 

\eyovTes opOco? epovp.ev, 

GEAI. 'OpOoTOLTOL [lev OVV. 20 

e HE. T/ 8' ; ocra KLvrjcrecos pieTacr\6vTa kcll o~ko- 



Vicc is 

analogov 

to (lineage, 

and both 

iiro similar 
to civil 
war. For 
each is a 
corruption 
of kindred 
elements 
arising 
from some 
dissension. 



3. OiS' av] Referring to ovk 
epadov snpr. 

6. etc tivos 8ia(f>opdt 8ia(p8apdv] 

This is the MS. reading: that 
of Cornarius, taken from a 
quotation of this passage by 
Galen, 8icxp8opds diacpopav, being 
supported only by a correction 
in Par. F. The object is to 
shew that sedition is a disease ; 
and it is more natural to speak 
of disease as a dissolution or 
decay of kindred elements in 
consequence of some dissen- 
sion amongst them, than as a 



dissension arising from some 
decay. 

11. §o£u? emdvpiais k.t.X.] Cf. 
Rep. 4, 439, 440. 

12. Xoyov Xv7raiy] Cf. Rep. 3, 
387, 338. 

1 3. Twv<p\avpu>s €)(6vTav] These 
words are an afterthought, and 
are placed in immediate con- 
struction with Tavra (viz. So|. 
«V. 8vp. i]8. Xoy. Xv7T.). TTovTjpia 

appeared above as a general 
word, but is here used with 
a special meaning, as distin- 
guished from dpaOla. 



50 



nAATONOS 



[gnorance 
is n kind of 
deformity, 
and may 

be c l- 

pared t" 
tlie bodily 
state, i?i 
which the 
movements 
of different 
members 
are inhar- 
monious 
and fail of 
accom- 
plishing 
their end. 



irov Tiva de'fjLeva, 7reipa>/j.ei>a tovtuu Tvy^aveiv, KaO' p. 
€KacrTiiu 6pfM]i> 7rupafj)opa avTov ylyverai koll diro- 
rvyyavet, irorepov avra (j)rjaop.ei-> viro avppLerpla^ 
tyjs 7T/309 akXtjXa rj rovvavTiov viro d/jLerpla? avid 
5 irdayetVj 

0EAI. ArjAov coy viro d\xeipla<s. 

HE. 'AAAa }xtjv yj/vxrjv ye \a/j.ei> aKOvaav irdaav 
irdv dyvoovaav. 

6EAI. l(/)6Spa ye. 
io HE. To ye f±r}v ayvoelv eariv eV dkr)6eiav opfxco- 
p.evr)s \j/v)(r)?, 7rapa(p6pov ^vveaeoos yiyvop-evi-js, ovSev d 
aXXo irXr/v irapa(f>pocrvvr). 

0EAI. Wdvv p.ev ovv. 



228. 



i. 7mpa)/iei>a] The omission 
of this word in the Bodleian 
MS. is probably due to the 

6po 107 eXeVTOV of 6£\i.tva.. 

2. napdcpopa avrov] Sc. rov 
o-Konov, " swerving from the 
mark." 

In Tim. 87 e (where the 
word napacpopoTTjs is used) the 
same connexion is noticed be- 
tween irregularity of action 
and disproportion of parts. 

4. avra wdcrxeiv] " Are thus 

affected." For the neut. plur., 
cf. Theset. 207 e, and note. 
Compare Ar. Eth. Nic. I. 13 : 

arenas yap Kaddnep ra rrapa'Xe- 
Xvpiva rov crcoparos peprf els to. 
he^ia npoaipovpevov Kivrjcrai rov- 
vavriov els ra apto~repa 7rapa(fie- 
perai, K.a\ en\ rrjs tjsvxrjs ovrcos' 
eiri ravavria yap al oppa\ rcov 
aKparcoW dXX' ev rols a-copaat pev 
opaipev to irapacpepopevov, enl 8e 
ttjs yj/vxrjs oi>x opcopev. But 
what Aristotle thus describes 
approaches more nearly to 



what Plato hei*e calls o-rdo-is 

rrji ^vxrjS. 

7 . \jfvxr)v ye — dyvoovaav ] 

This is emphatically the na- 
ture of " soul" or " mind" — 
according to the well-known 
Socratic or Platonic principle, 
which remains unaltered in 
the Laws. See Legg. 9, 860 d : 
as oi KaKol txavres els ndvra elalv 
anovres kokoi. 

II. TTapacpopov £weVecor] An 
etymological analysis, in the 
Cratylus vein, of 7rapacppo- 
o-vvt]. Cf. Legg. 6, 775 d: 

Trapd(popos — 6 pedvwv. 

Trapa<popov o-vvecrecos yiyvo- 
pevrjs tyvxrjs)] " And what is 
ignorance, but the aberration of 
a mind which is bent on truth 
but swerves aside from under- 
standing 1 " The gen. crvveo~ea>s 
is governed by wapa^opov, 
which agrees with if/vx^s. For 
this interpretation Ave are in- 
debted to the acumen of Hein- 
dorf. 



20<I>I2TH2. 51 

p. 228. aE. ^Vv^rjv apa avor^rov ala^pav kou ajJLirpov 
Oereov. 

GEAI. "Eolk€v. 

HE. "Ran 8)) 8uo ravra, a>9 tyaiveTcu., KdKOiv iv 
olvtyj yei/7], to /J.6V irovr)pia KaKovfievov vtto twv 5 
7toAAgw, voaos avrrjs aafpearara ov. 

GEAI. Nat. 

S?E. To oY ye ayvoiav fxev kccAovcti, KaKiav 8e 
(xvto eV v/'fX^ f^ovov yiyvopcevov ovk tOekovaiv 6/jlo- 
Xoyeiv. IO 

e 0EAI. Y^ofxibf} avy^coprjreou, o i'W 5?) Xe'tjavTos 
y/J-fayvor/crd aov, to 8vo eivca yivr) /cowa'ay eV ^v\f}, 
kou 8ei\iav fiev kcu aKoXaaiav kou olSlklolv ^vfiiravTa 
r}yi]T€ov voaov Iv tj/mv, to 8e r^y TroXXr]^ kou ttolvto- 
8aTrrj9 ayvoias iraQos oucryps Qztzov. 15 

HE. Ovkovv Iv acofxaTi ye 7rep\ 8vo iraOr^fiaTe 
tovtco 8vo Ttyya Tive eyeveadrjv ; 

GEAI. Tive tovtco ; 
'< 2 9- HE. rieyot /xeV alayos yvpivaaTLKrj, vrepl 8e voaov As gyi 



larpiKq. 20 counter- 

acts defor- 
mity, and 
1— *t-i /~\ > — \ \ \ r//-> \ ) o> / v medicine 

A Hi. UVKOVV KOU 7T€pi fX€V vppLV KOU CtOLKiaV KOU disease so 



0EAI. <Paivecr6ov. 



8. KaXovaiv — ovk <i6e\ovo-i] (cf. Symp. 215 c) requires yi- 
Sc. 01 7roXXot from t5>v noXKcbv yveadm. For the omission of 
supra. (ivai, cf. infr. 246 e: touto 8e 

9. eV tyvxfi y-ovov yiyvop.(vov\ ov aaifia i'n^/v^ov 6y.o\oyovo~iv. 

I. e. When mental is not com- 13. ^vfiTravra] Stallb. adds 

bined with bodily deformity: ravra from C. F. b, c, unnecessa- 

for the converse of which see rily. For nddos, infr., cf. Theajt. 

Rep. 3, 402 e: or iv \|/i%v 193d: to ttjs dogrjs Trdflos. 

fxovov, "only in the soul," as 16. nepl 8vo TradrjimTc] Cf. 

if that was a matter of less Phsedr. 261 c: nepl ndvra rd 

consequence. Stallb. 's inter- Xeyopeva pia tis rkyvr]. 

pretation, " earn esse eximie 22. Ovkovv kcu] "And in like 

(jxSvov) in animo pravitatem," manner.'' 

H 2 



nAATQNOS 



there is 
chastise- 
niriit for 
the cure of 
vice, and 

instruction 

to remedy 
tlie more 
latent evil. 



SeiAiuv y KoAacrriKi] 7T€(f>VK€ rtyvtov paAiara Or) p. 229. 
7ruau)V irpocn'/Kovaa '[ StKij-f ; 

0EAI. To yovv eiKO?, a>s tLiriiv Kara rr)v avOpu>- 
irivr)v 8oijai>. 
5 SE. T/ 6V; 7Tepl £yp.iraao.v ayvoiav fxcou aWrjv 
TLva ?) bibacTKaXiKyv opOorepov ehroi tis olv ; 

0EAI. Ovdefilav. 

SE. <£>epe 8iy 8L8a<TKaAiKr}s <5e dpa ev \16vov 
yevos (fxxreov eli>ai rj ttAcwb, Svo 8e rive avrrjs eivat b 
10 /xeyicTTco, aKOirec. 

0EAI. 2K07TCO. 

HE. Ka/ /uot SoKovpLtu rfjde av irr) rd^iara evpeiv. 



I. 19 KoKnariKT] — tSuo/t] The 
position of 81kt] in the sentence 
may be paralleled from many 
similar inversions in this and 
other dialogues. Many of 
Plato's rhythmical sentences 
end purposely with a dissyl- 
able, which is often sepa- 
rated from the natural con- 
nexion. And 8Ur) is similarly 
enumerated amongst other 
arts, including medicine, in 

Gorg. 478 b, C : XprjpaTiaTiKrj 
p.ev iTivias cmaKKarTei, larpiKJ) 
8e voo~ov, 8ikt] 8e aKokaaias Kat 

d8iKias. ri ovv tovtcov Kcik- 

Xhttov e<TTiv. — xP T H MaTia " riK l s > ' a * 
TpiKrjs, 8lkt)S ; ttoKv 8ia(pepei, a> 
2a)KpaTe<>, rj 8i<rj. lb. infr. : la- 
rpiKT] yiyverai Trovrjpias rj 81KT). 

The addition of KoXao-riKf) in 
the present passage is, how- 
ever, curious : for it is not 
clear from what other kind of 
justice corrective justice is 
here distinguished. I there- 
fore venture to suggest the 
very slight correction 8ikt), 
which is in some degree con- 



firmed by the frequency of 
tragic expressions in these 
dialogues. Cf. Soph. Electr. 
70 : aov yap ep\opai 8lktj Kaffap- 
ttjs. Ant. 94 : e^dpa 8e t<5 6a- 
vovri 7rp6<TKeio-ai 8lktj. And see 
Phaidr. 278c: 8ikj] ttov -noir\- 
ttjv — npoorepeis. Polit. 310 a: 
em tovtois tovt' eivat, re^vrj (pdp- 
pa<ov. Tim. 62 d: ovk ev 8lktj 
86£ei to prjdeu TrpoarjKOV ovopa 

\iyeiv. Thesetetus' answer, cos 
yovv — 86gav, is in harmony 
with this. It is not probable 
that S/K77 is a marginal note, 
since, except in the passage of 
the Gorgias above quoted, the 
term is hardly used with the 
precise meaning given to Ko\a- 
o-TiKT) here. The word is un- 
accentuated in the Bocll. MS. 
Compare the political appli- 
cation of the idea of mdappos 
already noticed in Legg. 5, 735 
and Polit. 293. 

9. rj TrXeia, 81/0 8e] Cf. Rep. 
4, 445 C : airetpa 8e rrjs KaKias 
(e'i8r)), rerrapa 8' ev avrols nVra 
hv Ka\ a{-iov eTTip.VT]0-6r)i>ai. 



204>I2TH2. 



229. 9EAI. Tlf,; 

3*E. Tyu ayvoiav Xhovjts ti ttyj Kara fxeaou avrr)? 
rofxrjv c')(ei riva. 8t7r\rj yap ai/Ti] ytyvop^vr) hifhov 
otl Kal t-i]v StSao-KaAiKyv 8vo avayKa<^u popia tytiv, 
cv e(f) iiA yevet twv avrrjs e/carepw. 



But ignor- 
ance, and 
therefore 

instruction 
also, is two- 
fold: the 
more uu- 
manage- 



3. roprju e'xti riva] Cf. Legg. 
12, 944 b: cr^efioi/ ovv ev 
rols oveibeaiv e\ei riva ropfjv t) 
rovrav twv 6vopdra>v eVi^opd. 
pfycurms pev yap ovk iv iraatv 
ovopd^oir av diKaicot, dnofiohevs 
8e ott\(ov. 

8ut\t} yap avTt) yiyvopevr) ] 
Cf. Gorg. 464 b : Avolv ovtolv 
toIv irpaypcLTotv 8vo \tya> re)(vas 
K.r.X. 

The meaning of pp. 226- 
231 may be thus stated : The 
Sophist professes to be an edu- 
cator ; and the highest form 
of education is that which 
leads men to know them- 
selves, and liberates them from 
the conceit of knowledge : in 
other words, the elenchus, or 
cross-questioning method. This 



Separation 
1 



is distinguished from the an- 
tiquated mode of correction 
by direct reproof, and also 
from the positive instruction 
which is given to those who 
are consciously ignorant of any 
subject. There is grave doubt 
whether the Sophist deserves 
to be called an educator in this 
highest sense : but the honour 
is yielded to him for the pre- 
sent, with the feeling that he 
will not retain it long. The 
serious thought, that educa- 
tion is the purification of the 
mind through the separation 
of the false from the true, is 
approached ironically through 
the trivial example of house- 
hold processes, and also through 
the following distinctions : 



Of like from like 



Of srood from evil = Purification 



Corporeal Mental 

(and mental evils are) 



, /cTTacrts\ 

novnpia I , I 

\ voaos I 



\aptTpiai 



(iiKha pepr) dpa6ias") 



TO /JLTJ KaTdOOTa 

,ti doKe'iv eldevai. 



Hence instruction is 



8i]ptovpyiKa\ 8i8ao-Ka\laL 



7ratSet'a 



vovdcnjriKrj eXey^c 



54 I1AATI2N02 

ablekind 0EAI. TV ovv ; Karacjjave^ nj] aoi to vvv (i]Tov- p. --•>• 

being stu- 
pidity, or fievov ; 

tliiit ignor- i— (T-i »a /?>»•? ' ' ^ ~ v \ 

ancewhich All.. Ayycuay o oiw /xeyce tl julol ooko) koll y^aXe- c 

tlie mind \ , , / * ~ 5<\ ~ v x > ~ 

mistakes 7TOV a(pCOpi(Tp.€VOV OpUV 6LOOS, TTOLCTL TOLS ClXXoL? CLVTt]? 

for know- > / /i / 

ledge. 5 aVTLOTaUfXOV fiepeCTlV. 

0EIA. IIokw &J; 

HE. To /u?) KareiSoTa tl 8oKc-iv eldevai' oY ou 
KLvdvvevti TrdvTa oaa diavola a<paXXop.e0a ylyveadai 
ttolctlv. 
io 0EAI. 'AA^. 

HE. Kal Srj /cat rovTcp ye olp.ai fxovco rip ayvolas 
afiaOla TOvvop.a TrpoaprjOrjvai. 

0EAI. Udvv ye. 

3?E. T/ 5e £7} rw 777? BiSao-KaXiKrjs apa fiepei tco 
i^tovto airaWaTTOVTi XeKTeov ; cl 

0EAI. Qifiou fxev ovv, co £eve, ro /xeV aAAo <5>7/.u- 

3. 'Ayvoias §' ow] Badham : norance, Phil. 48 cl, e ; Legg. 9, 

" 'Ayvolas y ovv legendum : est 86od; 863 c; 10,886 b; Symp. 

enim responsio aliqua ex parte I.e.; Phsedr. 275 b. Ale. 118 a: 

assentientis." So also the old avTr) ap f) ayvoia tcov kokcov ah [a 

editions. The words as they teal f] enoveidto-Tos dpadia. 
stand certainly take no account SV ov navra — iracriv] Because 

of the question, but continue men never act without think - 

the previous speech. ing they know. 

5. dvTicrTadfxov] " Which may 8. ndvra oaa acpaXKopeda = 

be weighed against all the Trdvra ra yiyvopeva fjplv acpdX- 

other parts of ignorance put para. Cf. supr. 226 e: oaa — 

together." The word belongs Kadalperai, and note. 

to tragedy. Cf. Soph. El. 561 : 11. pova] Badham conjectures 

cos — avTiaradpov tov Brjpos eV poplco, but pova has more point. 

Bvo-eie ttjv avTov Koprjv. For " This alone earns the title of 
xaXenov = difficult to handle, stupidity." Cf. Symp. 222 a: 

cf. Symp. 204 a : avro yap vovv e^ovras — povovs tcov Xoycov. 
tovto \a\en6v itrnv rj dpadia. I 4. Ti — XeKTeov] Sc. ovopa. 

7. To pfj KareiSora tl SoKeiv 16. to pev dXXo — 8i8aaKaXias] 

elftevai ] See, amongst other " The part which is separated 

places where the ignorant from this includes instruction 

conceit of knowledge is dis- in various handicrafts." A simi- 

tinguished from conscious ig- lar division is made in Phileb. 



20<I>I2TH2. 



55 



p. 229. ovpytna? 8i8aaKaAla9, tovto 8e tvOdde ye iraifciav 81 
y/jLCOU K€K\rj<j6ai. 

HE. Kai yap o-ye8ov, co 0ea/r>;re, Iv TraaivKX- 
Arjiriv. aAAa ya^o iip.lv en kou tovto aKeirTeov, el 
aTopLOv rjbrj eort 7ray, rj two. tyov 8iaipecriv a£iav 5 
hritivvixias. 

0EAI. Oukow ^77 CTKOTreiv. 

HE. Ao/Cet TOiVVV p.01 KOU TOVTO 6TL 7TY) a")(i^€a'$(U. 

0EAI. Karar/; 

HE. T779 eV rot? Aoyoiy 8i8ao-Ka\u<r}? r) /xeV r/)a- 10 
e xyTt'pa tl? eoiKev 6809 eivai, to 8* erepou avrrjs /jlo- 
pLov XetoTepov. 

0EAI. To irolov 8r) tovtcov €Ka.T€pop Aeycop.€i> ; 
HE. To pjev apxaioirpeires tl iraTpiov, a> npos 1 



The ari 
which 
removes 
tliis has the 
peculiarly 
( in* k 
name of 

IlatSfia — 

Education. 



55 C : ovkovv rjfxiv to pev — * 8tj- 
piovpyiKov to~Ti ttJS nep\ to. padi]- 
pctTa eTno~Ti]nrjs, to 8e nepl nai- 
8eiav m\ Tpo<pi)v ; Cf. also Protag. 
322 b, where 8rjpiovpyiKr] is op- 
posed tO 7T0\lTlKT). 

1. Traibeiav] The idea of 
education in the higher sense 
is due to Greek philosophy : 
appearing first in the saying- 
attributed to several of the 
early thinkers, noXvpadiri voov 

ov 8i8darKe(. 

6Y rjpSiv] " By our means." 
I. e. The use of the word by 
the Athenians has given it 
currency throughout this part 
of Greece : " a nobis (Athe- 
niensibus) noniinis hujus auc- 
toribus." — Heindorf. ' 

5. nav] Cf. Parmen. Fr. 6 1 : 

ov "nor erjv oi>8 earai, e7rei vvv 
i'ariv opov nav, €i> £vve)(es. I. e. 
whether we have reached the 

liTprjTov ei'Soj. 

8. KCli TOVTO €TL 771] (T\l^((T0ai] 



" This, like the rest, admits 
of being divided somewhere." 
The words kcu tovto '4tl are in 
exact keeping with fj8rj wdv 
supr. Cf. supr. 222c. Hermann's 
conjecture, koto, tovto, is un- 
necessaiy and awkward, be- 
cause anticipating the ques- 
tion, and because tovto has 
no antecedent. 

IO. Tijs — StSacr/caXtK^y] Traideia 
is assumed to be equivalent to 

rj ei> toIs \6yois 8t8a<TKa\iKr]. 

r) pev — 686s] Cf. Aristoph. 
Ran. sub. init. 

13. Xeyapev] Stallb. Aeyo/xej/, 
from Sn. i : perhaps rightly. 

14. To pev — o-TeWovTui] " The 

one a time-honoured ancestral 
mode, which men used chiefly 
towards their sons, and many 
still do so when they see them 
fallen into some error, either 
speaking roughly to them, or 
else more softly expostulating : 
which varieties may be cor- 



56 



IJAATQNOS 



Of which tovs vius fxaXuTT t\p(ovTo re kou en rroAXol y^piovTai p. 229 

there arc \ -, r / » ~ , •. r , \ \ 

twomodea Ta vvv i in( *- v avTOis ^ajxapTavcdat tl, to, peu %aXe- P- 2 . : 5° 

recognized: > \ o>\ \ n ' n ' v 

the old- irouvovTes, ra oe pLaXdaKoiTepm 7ra.pafivUovpi.evoL' to 

fashioned £> 9 y ' » v > a ' ■>' * n 

admonitory ° ovu CVpCTTav aVTO OpOOTaTa €L7TOL TL9 av VOVOtTr)- 

system ' 

of moral $TIKI)V. 

5R?' 9EAI. "Ee™ otrm. 



rectly included in the general 
name of admonition." 

" True." 

" Now for the other method. 
It would seem that some had 
reflected with themselves that 
stupidity is always involun- 
tary, and that no one who 
thinks himself wise will ever 
care to be a learner of those 
matters in which he fancies 
himself to be accomplished : 
moreover, that education in 
the form of admonition spends 
a world of labour with but 
small result." 

" And they were right." 

" Therefore they address 
themselves differently to the 
task of exorcising this con- 
ceit." 

The two modes of correc- 
tion may be compared with 
the two kinds of legislation 
(with and without explanation 
and persuasion) mentioned in 
the Laws, of which the former 
is there preferred : see esp. 
Legg. 4, 720 sqq. So far was 
Plato from reversing his judg- 
ment, as Mr. Grote (vol. iii. p. 
355, note on p. 354) supposes, 
respecting the vovderr/Tiicov el8os 
rrjs iraiSeias, which Protagoras 
advocates, Prot. 3 2 5 d : nai eav 

fxev 4ko>v TreldrjTai, — el 8e p,rj, 
wo-nep £u\ov 8ieo-Tpapp.evov Kal 



xapTTTopevov evdvvovariv aTreiXais 
Ka\ TrXrjynls. 

(14.) ap^aion penes tl ndrptou] 

A tragic expression; cf. Aesch. 

Prom. 409 : peyako<TXT)pova T iip- 

xaioirpi-irri — rlpav, where two ad- 
jectives are similarly combined. 

2. orav avTols] Cf. Rep. I, 
343 a : os ye airy ovts npo- 
ftciTa ovre rroipe'va yiyixocnceis. 

7. T6 8e ye] The Bodleian, 
in common with most of the 
MSS., omits (os (before e'i^am), 
which is not necessary, and if 
inserted will hardly affect 

the sense, for cos e'lgaaiv rjyr)- 
crao-Qai is equivalent to ^yrj- 
(TavTO, cos e'i£a(Ti. Cf. infr. 263 d: 
as eoiice — yiyvearBai, and note. 

The introduction of a sentence 
with to 8e out of construction, 
or rather in apposition, is very 
frequent in Plato, and scarcely 
needs illustration. Compare, 
however, Polit. 263 c : to 8e 
ye, o> ttclvtcov dv8peLOTa.Te, Ta.% 
av, e'l ttov (ppovipov etrri tl £a>ov 
eTepov, oiov 8oKe7 to tcov ye- 
pdvcov, rj tl tolovtov ciWo, Kara 
TavTa iacos 8iovop.d£oi. If cos 

is retained, which is perhaps 
better on the whole, as e'L^ao-l 
Tives riyrjaao-daL k.t. A. IS equi- 
valent to rjyTjo-apevoi Tives, cos 
ei£ao~i — o~TeX\ovTCii. 

Xoyov eavTols 86vres] " On re- 
flection." Cf. Hdt. I.34: 'o 8' 



5()<I>I2TH2. 



p. 230. 86i>T€? I'lyrjaacrOoLL irairav ukovitlov up.a0lai> etVat, kcil 
fiaOeiv ouSeis ttot av iOeXeiu tov olofievov tlvai 

O~0(J)0V TOVTCOV Q)V OLOLTO TTtpl SetVO? elvai, /X€TCX 8t 

noXXov ttovou to vov0€ty)tikov ettW rrj? nut^eta? 
tr/jLiKpou avvreiv. \ 

0EAI. 'QpOcos: ye vopl^ovTe?. 

HE. TS tol tolvti]? rr/s Soljrjs eiri ei<(3oXr)v aXXco 
b TpOTTCd (TTeXXouTat. 

0EAI. T/w S77 ; 

SE. AiepcoTaHTiv <£>v av otrjTal rU tl irept XeyeLV 
Xeycov prjSev' dff are 7rXav(o/JLevcov tols Soija? paStco? 
€$J€Ta{pvo-i, kcu crvvdyovTes 8rj rois Xoyois els Tavrov 
TiOeaat Trap aAA^Aay, tl0€vt€? Se iTribeLKvvovaiv 
auras avTols afia wepl tcov avTcov npbs tol aura 



tlms de- 
scribed. 

that do 
man h i >hea 

pid, and 
that the 

source of 
error lies 
in the con- 
ceit of 

wivl'Mn : 

too, thai 
the old me- 
thod was 

lal.nr'i.H!,, 
and had 
small 
result, 
there are 
some who 
address 
themselves 
differently 
to the task 



(Trei8fj i^ytpBrj Kcii \6yov eavrco 
c8ookc, KaToppoo8r)(ras tov oveipov 
ayerat ra ttcu8\ yvvaiKa. Soph. 
OEd. Eex. 583 : Ovk, el 8i8oirjs 
y , cos cyoo, (ravrco \6yov. 

2. oi8ev ttot av idckeiv] So 

Bodl. Alii., Stallbaum. Edd. 
Vet. oiSeVore. It desei'ves 
mention that Heindorf had 
at one time been led to con- 
jecture oiBev, because of tov- 
tcov following, but had after- 
wards contented himself with 
making tovtcov depend on 
nipt, 

3. ao<p6v — cWos] Plato iro- 
nically uses the words as syno- 
nymous. Cf. Theset. 173 b: 

8eivoi re Kai cro0oi yeyovorcs, wf 
o'iovtcu. lb. 177 a : Ka * p elnoopev 
on, civ prj aTTaWaytocri ttjs 8ci- 
VOT7JTOS k.t.X. 

fXCTCl 8e 7ToXXou TToVov] This 

is the same lesson which 
experience has taught to 
schoolmasters and others with- 



in our own memory. But few 
of them have found so good 
a substitute for the old- 
fashioned vov6eT7]TiKrj as the 
Socratic elenchus. 

7. Too toc] Cf. Theset. 179 

d : Top toi — paK\ov CTKCTTTCOV. 

8. (ttcWovtcu ] " Address 
themselves." SrfXXecr&u is si- 
milarly used in Legg. 10, 892 : 

oxikovv to. pcTa Tavra eVr' avTo 8rj 
tovto o-TcWcopcda ; lb 893 b, 

Phileb. 50 e. 

10. AiepcoTcoaiv yri tovtcov) 
nepl cov civ tls o'irjTai ti \cyeiv. 

11. TrXavoopevoov] Hc.toov uvBpoo- 

7T00V. Cf. I Aldb. 117a: TTCpi 

toov diKaioov Kal adiKoov arroKpivo- 

pevos (figs TrXavacrdai ; eha ov 
8Fj\ov oti 81a. to pf] cl8evai nepl 
avrcbv, 81a. tcivtci nXava ; Lys. 
214 a. 

14. Tvep\ toov cwtoov k.t.X.] Cf. 

Rep. 4, 436 e : cos ttotc ti to 

civto ov cipa Kara to civto irpbs to 
avTo TclvavTia ttciQol. 



58 



riAATONOS 



of getting 
rid of this 
conceit. 

Cross-ques- 
tioning 
men on 
points of 
which they 
are assured, 
they drive 
them into 
contradic- 



kclto. ravra evavrias. oi 5' opwvTts eavrol? fxtv p. 230. 
XakeTraivovai, irpos 8e tovs aXXovs ^p-epovvrai, Kai 
tovtco Si) tco Tpoircd rQ>v irepi avrovs fieyaXcov KOI 
aKkrjpcdv doijcov airaXXarTOVTai iracrwv re dwaXXa- c 
5 ycou (xkov€lu [re] rjdlaTTju Kai rw iravyovri fiefiaioTara 
yLyvojievrju. vofii^ovTes yap, co iral c/u'Ae, oi Kadal- 



1. 6pS>vTes~\ Sc. to (TriSeiKvvo- 
fxevov. 

eavrols /.lev xaXeTraivovai] Cf. 
Theffit. 168 a : eavrovs aiTid- 

(TOVTai K.T.X. 

2. TTpos 8e tovs aXXovs rjp.] 
Cf, Thetet. 2IO: tjttov eaei ftapvs 
roiy (Tvvovo-i Kai fjpepaiTfpos, o~a>- 
(ppovcos ovk olopevos el8evai 6 prj 
olada. 

3. tcdv irepl avrovs] " Which 

encompass them." The same 
expression might be used of a 
disease, or of unwholesome hu- 
mours. Perhaps avrovs should 
be read. The Bodl. (ut ssepe) 
has no breathing. 

4. o-K\r]pS)v] " Stiff," " un- 
bending," " unyielding." Cf. 
Crat. 487 d : to (TKXrjpov re Kai 
dp€Tao-Tpo(j)ov, o 8r) appaTOV Ka- 
Xelrai. Charm. 175 d: ovrcas 
fjpcov fvrjdiKwv Tvxovaa rj £rjT7]0~is 

xai ov o-Kkrjpcbv. Theset. 155 e : 

o~K\r)povs ye Xeyeis Kai uvtitvttovs 
dudpcJonovs. 

7rao~£)v re anaXXaycov ukovsiv 
[Te]r)o'lo-Tr)v] TheVat.alone rejects 
the second re. If this is fol- 
lowed, the displacement of re 
may be defended from Eep. 9, 
572 a, Phsedr. 269 c. For the 
cogn. accus., cf. Eep. 6, 496 e. 

5. /3e/3aioYara yiyvopevqv] Cf. 

Legg. 2, 663 e : KaXbv f) dXr)- 

6(ia Kai p.6vtpov. 

6. vop,l£ovT(s yap] The con- 
struction of this sentence is 
broken off by the introduction 



and application of the simile, 
as in Phileb. 58 c : 7/ 8' etnov 
— etircopev. Kep. 3, 402 b, C 
Theset. 197 c, alib. The idea 
of voplfrvTes is then resumed in 
the finite verb 8ievorj6r]o-av, and 
the apodosis is postponed, or 
rather is absorbed into the sub- 
ordinate clause rrplvav tis — nXeia 
8e pi). By a kind of attraction 
the latter part of the sentence 
follows the analogy of the &o-nep 
clause. For clkovuv jjSiW^v, cf. 
Apol. 23 c: oi veoi — avToparoi 
Xa'ipovcnv aKovovres e^eTa^opevwv 
tcov avdpioTvav. The regularity 
of the sentence might be re- 
stored thus : TavTbv 8iavorj0evTes 

eKeivoi, — Karao~Tr]0~avTes, e^eXov- 

Tes, Kadapov dne(pr)vav k.t.X. 

" For such, dear youth, are the 
thoughts of their purifiers. Just 
as the physicians of the body 
think (vevopLiKaa-i, frequentative 
perfect) that a body cannot 
profit by the food received, until 
the obstructing matters are cast 
forth, in like manner these 
reason about the mind, that it 
will never obtain benefit from 
the learning which it receives, 
until, by cross-examination, 
the person cross-examined be 
put to shame ; and a riddance 
being made of the notions 
which obstruct learning, the 
man is purged, and thinks he 
knows no more than what he 
really knows." 



20*I2TH2. 



59 



p. 230. povTes avTou?, cocrirep 01 irep\ ru aco/xara larpul 

VtVOpLLKOUTL fit) 7TpOT€pOV OLV TY}9 7TpOCT(f)€pop€U7]? Tpo- 

(prj? airoXaveiv SuvaaOat crcopa, irpiv av tcl ep.7ro8l- 
tbvTa ev avrco ris €/c/3aA?7, tovtov /cat 7rept ~^/v\i]9 
$L€voi]6r)crai> e/cetVot, per) npoTepov avTiqv t^iv tcov 

d irpoaCiSepopevcov paQipxcvrcov ovrjatv, irp\v av eXeyyow 
Tis tov eXey^optevov el? a\(jyyvr\v Karaarrjaa?, ras" 
toI<s paOrjpacriv epL7rodiov? Sofja? efjc-Xcov, KaOapov 
a7ro(j)->]i/r) /cat ravTa rjyovpLevov, airep oldev, eidevai 
ptova, 7rAe/a) 8e pr\. 

GEAI. BeAr/an? yovv kcu aco^povearaTq tcov 
e'tjecov avrrj. 

3?E. Aid Tama Srj Tvavra rjpuv, co QeaLTme, /cat 
rov eheyxpv XeKTeov ebs apa peylaTrj kcu KvpLcoTa.Tr) 
tcov KaOapaecov ecrTL, kcu tov dveXeyKTOv av vopi- 
(TTeov, av /cat Tvyyavr) fiaaiXev? 6 p.kyas cov, to. 

e peyicrTa aKaOapTOV bvTa, airaibevTov re /cat alcr^pov 
yeyovevac Tama, a KaOapcoTaTov /cat kccXXicttov 
67rpe7re tov ovtco? iaopevov ev8aip.ova elvat. 



6. 7rpoa(pepojjL(vcov'\ The verb 
irpoartpipeiv is more often applied 
to physic than to diet (Thucyd. 
II. 51, Plato Charm. 157 c, 
Phsedr. 270 b), but is conve- 
nient here as equally applicable 
to food and instruction. Cf. 
Legg. 7, 809 e : trorepov fls dxpi- 
/3eiai' rov padi'iparos Ireov — 77 to 
wapdnav cwSe irpoo-oicrTeov. 

13 — 15. Kal Kal] " Not 

only — but." 

15. tov dveXeynTOv] Cf. Apol. 
38 a: 6 dvegeracrTOS fiios ov /3tco- 
tos dvdpanrco. 

1 6. av Kal (3ao-t\ei>s 6 peyas i]] 

Compare Theset. 175 c: v & a - 



o-i\evs evbaipav. Lys. 2 09 e : 
JJpos Ai'or, tjv 6° eya>, t'i cipa 6 
p.iyas j3acn\evs; k.t.X. Euthyd. 
274 a: MaKap('£o) ap vpds eycoye 

TOV KTTjpaTOS 7ro\l> pdXXov 77 /Xf- 

yav j3ao~i\ea ttjs ap^r;?. And for 

ra peyio-Ta, in which there is 
perhaps a slight allusion to 
the greater mysteries, cf. Rep. 

6,504 a : TTola S>) Xeyeis pa6r]paTa 
peyictTa k.t.X. Polit. 301 a. 

17. dnalbevTov re Kal alo~xpov] 

Since it was proved that dpa- 
6ia, of which education is the 
remedy, is a kind of alaxos. 
Supr. 228 d. 

1 9. eirpene} Sc. yeyovevai. 



per 
ceii ing 
« bieh, the 

angry with 

tin in 
and I' -- 
disposed 
to be con- 
tentious 
towards 
othi 1 , 
In this 
way tliey 
are most 
surely re- 
lieved by 
an opera- 
tion, which 
it is de- 
lightful 
to witness, 
of the 
stubborn 
tumors of 
self-con- 
ceit. For 
- mental, 
like bodily 
food, can 
do no good 
to the sick 
man, until 
the noxious 
obstruc- 
tions of 
vanity are 



()•() 



IIAAT12N02 



removed, 

and ;i 

w lii>U'snnie 
state of in- 
i llcctual 
humility 
has been 
restored. 
Thus refu- 
tation is 
the great- 
est of all 
purgations: 
and even 
the Great 
King, if he 
has not 
undergone 
this test, is 
uneducated 
and there- 
fore un- 
happy. 



0EAI. l\avTa.Trao-L ptv ovv. p. 230 

HE. T/ 84 ; tovs; TavTr) yjpcojiivovs rrj re^vrj 
rivets (f)/]ao/jL€i> ; iyco fxev yap (j)o(3ovpai cro(pi<TTas p. 231 
(f)ai>ai. 
5 0EAI. T/AJ; 

HE. M?) fxutpv avrots TrpocraTTTwiiev ytpas. 

0EAI. 'AAAa firju irpocreoLKe tolovtco tlvl tol vvv 
elprjfieva. 

HE. Kal yap Kvvl Xvko?, aypK^rarov rj/jLepcoraTU). 

orov 8e aa(J)a\rj Set ttclvtcdv pLaXiara irepl ras 6/jloio- 

Ti]Tas del TTOLeiaOat tttjv (j)vXaKiqv' 6\i(T0r)poTaTOi> 



6. avrols] Sc. rois (rocpi- 

(TTClTs. 

7. roiovra tiv\ to. vvv elprjpevaj 
" The modes of action which 
have been described (e. g. the 
art of controversy) bear some 
resemblance to this purifying 
method of education." 

9. Kal yap kvv\ \vkos] Mr. 

Grote remarks on this, that 
Plato would have objected to 
the wolf being placed in the 
same genus with the dog. He 
would certainly have objected 
to class them together as 'tame' 
or ' wild.' But he here recog- 
nizes the likeness between 
them, on which, had it suited 
his purpose, he might have 
dwelt to the exclusion of the 
difference. This illustrates the 
unfixed and provisional nature 
of Plato's classification, but 
nothing more. Cf. Rep. 5, 
454 b, where it is shewn that 
differences are no less treacher- 
ous than resemblances, except 
to those who are able ko.t ei'S?7 
(Tvvdyeiv kcl\ Siaipelcrdai. 

io, t6v 8e d<T<pa\r)~\ The heed- 



ful cautious man — the cha- 
racter described in Soph. (Ed. 
Rex. 616 as 6 ev\a(Bovpfvos 
ireaeiv. 

ivepl ras 6poioTr)Tas] These 
words recal Euclides' objection 
to the argument from ana- 
logy. Diog. Laert. II. 107 : 

Kal tou 81a Trapafiokrjs \6yov 
dvypei, ~keya>v rjroi if; opoloov av- 
tov fj e£ dvopoicov avvl(TTaa-6ai' 
Kai ei [lev e'£ Spolav, wepi avrd 
8elv paXKov r) ols opold earcv dva- 
arpecpeadai, et 8e e£ dvopoioov, nap- 
ekneiv tt/v napddea-iv. Cf. Phsedr. 
262 b, c, 273 d. Ar. Eth. Nic. 
VI. 3, 2 : et Set aKpifioXoyel- 
uQai Kal prj dicoXovdelv reus opoi- 

oTrjcnv. But Euclides dwelt 
merely on the logical weak- 
ness of comparisons: Plato 
here speaks practically of the 
danger which attends their 
use. Compare the consciousness 
of modern times on the same 
point, Avhich some one has ex- 
pressed by saying that Analogy 
is like a broken reed, good to 
point with but not to lean 
upon. 



2C)<M2TH2. 



61 



p. 231. yap to yevos. opcos 8e eaTcoaau' ov yap nepl 
arpiKpcov opoav ri^v dp.(f)io-(3i']Tr]aiu otopat ytvqataQaL 
b Tore oirorav 'tKavois ([wXaTTcocnv. 
0EA1. Ovkovv to ye et/coy. 

S?E. "Rctto) 8rj diaKpiTiKrj? Ttyy i]s KaOapTiKrj, KaO- ; 
apTiKrjs 8e to nepl ^rv\r]v pepos d(j)ct)pLa0o}, tovtov 
8e 8i8ao-KaAiKr), 8i8ao~Ka\iKrjs 8e 7rai8€VTLKr}' tyjs 8e 
7rai8evTLKrj9 6 irep\ tt]v ptaTaiov 8o^oao(f)lav yiyvo- 
p,evos kXeyyps eV ra vvv Xoyw 7rapa(pai>€VTi p.r)8ev 
aXK rjpuv elvai Xeyea0a> TrXrjv rj ye'wi yevvaia ao(j)L- 1 

OTlKq. 

0EAI. AeyeaOco puiv' airopco 8e eycoye rj8r) 81a. 

e to 7roXXa 7T€(f)ai'dai i tl ^prj iroTe cos dXrjOrj Xeyovra 

Ka) 8uo-yypi(ppevov ear eat ovt&s elvai tov ao<pLaTrji>. 

HE. Elkotgos ye crv diropwv. dXXd tol KaKtivov 

rjyeicrOaL XPV vvv rj8rj a(j)68pa diropelv oirrj ttotc en 



But by 

shall the 
111:1 rter "i" 

called ' 

The fun.- 
t ions as- 
signed bo 
the Sophial 
bear some 
relation to 
this. And 
yet he 
seems 
scarce 
worthy of 
so high a 

' dignity. 
Analogies 
aresHppery 
ground. 
The savage 
wolf wears 
some re- 
semhlance 
to the gen- 

. tie dog. 

' Let us, 
however, 
grant him 



I. Eoraow] Sc. aocpurrai ol 

Taxirrj -^pwfievot. rfj re^vrj. Cf. 
ovtoi fxev yap, el 



Men. 92 d 

<tv j3ov\ei, earaxrav ol ao<pio~TaL. 
ov yap Trcpl arpiKpav opwv\ 

" When they begin thoroughly 
to guard their confines, the 
contest will be for no trifling 
boundary." I. e. The difference 
is great. The name is granted 
to them provisionally, with the 
warning that they may have to 
defend their title hereafter 
against the rightful owner. Cf. 
Phileb. 56 d : ou o-piKpos Spos. 
Legg. 11, 916 e: q peLfrvs v 

e'Xarrous opovs del Set diaaacpelv. 

Note the false echo in (pvXaicrjv 

— (pvXaTTCocriv. 

8. 8ogoo-o<plav] The word oc- 
curs in Phileb. 49 a, d, and the 
adj. 8o£6o-oqbos in Phsedr. 275 b. 

9. napatpavevri] " which has 



appeared by a side wind, out 
of due course." This inquiry 
did not arise directly out of 
the preceding : supr. 226, a, b. 
Cf. The?et. 199 c: detvorepov 
p.ei>Toi Trados ak\o TrapaCpaivecrdat, 

ptoi SoKet. Nvv is to be taken, 
i/7rfp/3aro)r, with the participle. 

IO. rj yevei yevvaia cro<£.] Cf. 

Soph. (Ed. Kex. 1469 : iff & 
yovfi yewah. Compare the tragic 
grandiloquence of Pep. 5, 454 a : 

f] yevvaia tj 8uvap.is /c.r.X. It is not 

meant to distinguish the So- 
phist " of a noble stamp" from 
the " degenerate variety." 

13. its a\r]6fj Xeyovra] "What 

definition of the Sophist one may 
assert with entire confidence." 
16. dnopelv] There is an allu- 
sion to the literal meaning = 
avev nopov, " having no passage 
for escape." 



6 ( 2 



nAATQNOS 



tliis pro- 
visionally, 

l'..ivsi'1'iny 
that he 
will have 
to fight 
hard here- 
after for 
his claim. 
We are em- 
barrassed 
with the 
number of 
our defini- 
tions ; the 
only com- 
fort is that 
the So- 
phist's 



merit must 
be still 
greater. 
We have 
surrounded 
him : let us 
now close 
in upon 
him. We 
have had 
glimpses of 
him as a 



8iadvcr€Tai tov XoyoV opOij yap r/ irapoipla, to tois p. 231 
airaaas p.i] padiov elvai hiafyevyeiv . vvv ovv koll 
pLaXiara ewiOeTeov avTcp. 

SEAL KaXcos Xeyeis. 
5 AE. YlpcoTOv 67; (TTavrts oiov e^avairvevacopev, 
/cat irpos i)pas avrovs StaXoyicrcDpLeOa apa avairavo- 
pLevoi, — (f)€pe, oirocra ypuv 6 ao(piaT7]9 7re<fiavTai. Sokco 
p.ev yap, to irpwTov evpeOrj vecov /ecu TrXovaiccv ep,- d 
pLicrdos Orjpevrys. 
co 0EAI. N«. 

SE. To 8e ye SevTepov epiropos tls irepi tcl 7779 
yjrv)(f}$ fxaOyfiara. 

0EAI. YIdvv ye. 

SE. Tpirov 8e apa ov 7repi ravra ravra KamqXos 
[5 avefyavr] ; 

0EAI. Na/. Ka\ reraprov ye avT07rcoXr)9 7repl ra 
pLaOrjpara -qpuv. 



1. ras airdaas] Heindorf 
supplies Xaftds, comparing Phi- 
leb. 13 d: dvievcu is rds opolas. 
But the word 8ia<pevyecv, and 
the whole context, rather sug- 
gest the metaphor of a chase. 
Some such word as oppas, or 
7T€ipas, would therefore supply 
the meaning better. 

2. Ka\] " Now therefore is 
the very time of all others to 
set upon him." /cat gives an 
emphasis to the clause in op- 
position to the previous doubt. 
Similar idiomatic uses of ko.1 
are Symp. 177b: tovto p.ev 

rjTTov leal Bavpacrrov. Legg. 6, 
752 d : ras pev ovv akXas xal 
ftpaxvTepov epyov. 

5. o-Tavres] Like men who 
have been stooping and press- 
ing forwards. 



egavairv.] eg seems to im- 
ply turning aside from the 
pursuit ('standing out,' Shak- 
speare) for a breathing while. 
Compare igavurrdvai. 

7. (pipe, oirocra] (pipe, like 

dpeXei, has become a sort of 
particle, and is retained in the 
indirect form. Cf. Theset. 
190 b : otl Travros paXXov to 
tol KaXov alaxpdv. Tb. C cos nav- 
TdnacTiv apa k.t.~S. 

8ok5) pev yap] 8okco is here 
used parenthetically, like 0U1 
in Theset. 147 a. For pev, cf. 
supr. 230 e, alib. 

11. tcl rrjs yfn>XV s F% flra ] 
A pleonastic expression, sug- 
gested by the analogy of r) tov 

aapaTos rpocprj. Vid. SUpr. 

224 a. 

17. rjp.lv] Heindorf added rjv 



2CXM2TH2. 



63 



o. %$i. SE. 'Op0a>? e/JLvrj/jLovevaa?. Tre/mrou <5' eyo) 7T(l- 
o pa.o~op.aL pvrjpoveveiv rrj? yap ayoL>VL(JTiKi)S 7rep\ 
Aoyous tjv tis adXi-jTrj^, tijv epi<TTiK>]i> rlyvrjv dcjjcopt- 
apevos. 

0EAI. H^ yap ovv. 5 

HE. To ye fjLTjV Iktov apL^La^rrjaipov p.ev, o/xeo? 
8* edeptev avrco avyxwp/jo-avTe? 8o^cov €/x7ro<5tW p.a- 
Orjfxacn TrepL y^rv\i]v KaOapTr/v avrov elvat. 
GEAI. WavTairaai p.ev o\)V. 
2 3 2 " SE. 'Ap ovv evvoeis, orav hno'Trjp.wv tis ttoWcdv™ 
(f)aii>r/Tai, puas 8e T€)(yr)$ bvo\xari irpocrayopevrjTai, to 



I I -in. in. 

:i merchant - 

a :-ll"|' 

keeper, a 
manufac- 
turer, :i 
mental 
athl( fce, 



from conjecture. But rjy.lv may 
depend on the verbal meaning 

of avTOTva>\r)s nepl to. fiadijfiara. 

" One who sells us learned 
wares of his own manufac- 
ture." 

2. rrjs dycoviOTLKris Trepl \6yovs 

dflXq-Tjy] rrjs dy. is partitive; 
and 7repi \6yovs is to be joined 
with ddXrjTTjs. " Under the 
head of contention he appeared 
as a champion in argument." 

3. d<pcopio-pevos] " Having ap- 
propriated to himself." Perf. 
pass, with middle signification. 
Of. infr. 268 sub fin. : rrjs 71-0177- 
<re<os dcpwpLapevov iv \6yois to 
6avp.aroTvouK.6v popiov. 

6. To (ktov is nominative 

to dpa^io-^rjTrjo-Lpov rjv, but must 

be again supplied as the ad- 
verbial accusative Avith Wepev 
— eivai, like to 7rpS)Tov evpeOr) 
above. " His sixth character 
was open to dispute, but still 
we so far yielded to his claim 
that we described him, sixthly, 
as a purger of conceits which 
obstruct learning in the region 
of the mind." 



7. paOwao-i] The Bodl. MS., 

with A. EL, has padrjcnv. 

10. 'Ap ovv evvoeis — npoaayo- 

pevei] " Do you perceive, then, 
that when one who receives 
his name from a single art 
seems to command various pro- 
vinces, this appearance is not 
to be trusted, but whoever 
has such an impression of any 
science is clearly unable to dis- 
cern that point of it wherein 
these various parts of know- 
ledge meet, whence he gives 
many names instead of one to 
the man who knows them." 

We have had various glimpses 
of the Sophist, but have no- 
where been able to get a clear 
view of him. Why is this 'I 
Because we have not yet seized 
the leading principle of his art, 
if indeed there be a leading 
principle. When we remem- 
ber that tmreality is afterwards 
proved to be the Sophist's 
principle, the irony of the 
present passage becomes ma- 
nifest. 

11. to (pdvTaapa roGro] Cf. 



64 



1IAATQNQ2 



But we are 
still to seek 
for a clear 
and con- 
sistent 
view. 



Lb. 

Transition 

toil. 

The notion 
of contro- 
versy 
seemed to 
approach 
most nearly 
to him. 
Suppose 
we follow 
him upon 
this track. 



(f)d^Ta(T/j.a tovto w? ovk eaff vyies, dXXa SrjXov coy 
6 Tvdo-yuiv avrb 7rpo? riva re^yqv ov hvvarai Karihfiv 
tKtivo olvti]9, els o iravTa tol pa6i]prxTrx ravra (3Xi7rei, 
Sio Kai 7roXXoi? ovofiacnv dvff eVoy rov typvTa avrd 
5 7rpoaayopev€L ; 

0EAI. KivSvvevet tovto TavTrj tty] /idXiaTa ir€(j)v- 
Kevai. 

SE. Mr) to'lvvv r)fxei9 ye amo ev Trj (rjTrjaei 8i 

dpyiav Traa^co/uLev, dXX' 6.vaXa^(Ofxev irpwTOV twv 

lowepl top aofyio-Trjv elpr/pLevcov. ev yap ti llol LiaXiaTa 

KCLT€(f)dl>r) OVTOV LLTjVVOV. 

0EAI. To ttoIov ; 

HE. 'AvriXoyiKOV olvtov efyaiiev eivai ttov. 

0EAI. No/. 
15 HE. TV 6" ; ov kol tcov aXXcov avTOv tovtov 
bi^daKaXov ylyvecrOai ; 

0EAI. Tlfirjv; 

HE. ^K07ra>pL€P Sr) 7rep\ t'lvo<s apa Kai abaalv ol 
tolovtol iroieiv dvTiXoyiKovs ■. r) Se o-Keyjfis tjliiv e£ 



p. 232. 
b 



Phileb. 57 C : ev tovtois 8e dp" 
ov Tiva rkyvi]v ms opwvvpov 
(pdey£dpevos, els 86£av KaTao-rrjcras 
as fJLias, TraXiv cos 8vo1v enavepara 
Tovrotv avrolv K.T.X. 

2. 6 Tvao-^av avrb rrpos Tivaj 
I. e. to (paiverai to toiovto ivepi 
nvos Texvrjs. Cf. Ar. Pol. IV. 7. 

5. 7rpoo~ayopeiei] Sc. 6 Trdo-^oiv 
avro. 

9. dvakdfiapev TrpSiTov\ "Let 
us begin by reviewing some of 
our results." Tbe word is used 
absolutely in the same technical 
sense in Theset. 187 c : *Ap' ovv 

st ci^iov nepl 86£r]s dva\a(3elv 
■nd\iv ; Phileb. 60 d : vvv ovti- 
o~ovv iiravakaficov dpBoTepov ei- 



wara). Hence it is unnecessary 
to insert ev with Heindorf or 
ti with C. et corr. B. irpwrov 
is used adverbially, ut supra : 
rrpaTov oiov o~TavTes. 

18. Kai gives emphasis to the 
question as raising a fresh point 
in connexion with the pre- 
ceding. They profess to make 
men controversialists. Well, 
on what subject % Cf. Euthyd. 

272 d : iv a el8S>, ti Ka\ paBrj- 
aopeBa. 

19. e£ dpxr/i — TfloV JT17] " In 

examining this let us take 
a comprehensive survey, and 
begin as follows." For ?'£ dp- 
xys, cf. Theset. 180 d. 



2CXM2TH2. 



65 



p. 232. dpxv? to-TQ) rfjde -rrrj. (pe'pe, irepl rwv deicov, <xr 
dcfiavr} rots 7roA\ols, dp lkcxvovs ttoiovotl tovto 
dpaif ; 

GEAI. Aeyerai [y]oiw 8r) irepl olvtmv tolvtoi. 

SE. TV S" 6aa (fyavepd yrjs re kcu ovpavov kou 5 
Ttov 7T€pl rd toiolvtcl ; 

0EAI. Tiydp; 

SE. 'AAAet /x?)z> ev ye tolls i8lcu? crvi>ovorlais, 
bivoTav yeveaem re kcu ovala? irepi Kara irdvTwv 
Xeyrjral tl, i-vviapev a>? avrol re dvreLirelv 8eLi>oi 1° 
rovs re dWov? otl ttolov(Tlv direp avrol ftvvarovs ; 

GEAI. Ylavrdircuri ye. 
d HE. TV 5' au 7re/3t vopcav /ecu ^vprrravrcov rwv 



I. Trepi to>j> tfeiW] Cf. Rep. 

10, 598 e, where the same 
thing is said of the poets : kcu 
rd ye 6ela. 

4. yow] The MSS., with 
exception of Flor. i, have ovv. 

5. otra Cpavepd] Ar. Eth. Nic. 
VII. 7 : dvOpamov aXXa rroXXd 
Beiorepa ttjv (pvaiv, oiov (pavepa- 
rard ye e£ iov 6 Kocrpos o~vvearr)Kev. 
The distinction between the 
visible and invisible in Divine 
things is perhaps the same as in 
Tim. 41a: ndvres oaoi re Trepu 
7to\ov<ti (pavepas <a\ ocroi (paivov- 
rai Kad' ocrov av edeXcoai 6eoi. 
Or, possibly, the words oa-a 
dcpavrj rols 7roXXoT? may suggest 
the difference between the or- 
dinary and the scientific per- 
ception of the heavenly mo- 
tions. Cf. lb. 39 c : twv S' 
SXXwv Tas TTepiobovs ovk evvevo- 
r/Kores av6pcoTroi, nXrjV oXiyoi 
ru)v iroXXmv k. T. X. 

yrjs re ml ovpavov] Gen. 

of apposition after a neut. 



plur. adj., like ao-rjpa — /3o^r 
Soph. Ant. 1209. 

6. rail/ nep\ to roiavra] Cf. 
Theset. 145 d: Ka\ t£>v nepl 
do-rpovopiav re nai dppovlas re 
Kai Xoyiapovs. 

7. Tiydp ;] " What, indeed V 
ydp is the usual formula of 
assent, confirming the previous 
question : = " You may well 
ask." 

8. tv ye rati Idiais avvovaiais] 
" In private conversations " 
— Which are the proper sphere 
of dvTiXoyiKi) as distinguished 
from SiKaviKTj, to which refer- 
ence is presently made ; cf. supr. 
225 b. For the limitation 
with ye, cf. Theset. 204 d : rav- 

tov cipa, ev ye rols oaa e£ dpidpov 
eo~TL, to re ndv npoo~ayopevopev 
/cat Ta anavTa. 

9. Trepl yeveaeios re Ka\ ovo-ias 

— XeyrjTai ti ] " When any 
general statement is made re- 
specting the woi-ld of tran- 
sitional or of absolute Being." 



K 



(>G 



nAATONOS 



Bedisputes 

and teaches 
others to 
dispute, 
about 
things 
divine, 
mundane, 
metaphy- 
sical, legal, 
political, 
and on the 
subject 
matter of 
every 
branch of 
art. The 
Sophist 
seems to 
have the 
power of 
disputing 
about all 
things. 



ttoXitlkwv, dp oi>)( viricryyovvTai TTOLtlv ufX(fjta(3r)Tr]- p. 232. 

TLKOVS ; 

0EAI. OvSels yap av olvtoIs, coy eiros eiirelv, 
SieAe'yero p.r) tovto \mio-yyovp.evois. 
5 HE. Ta ye prjv irep\ iracrcov re kou Kara p.lav 
eKaaTrjv Te\vrjv } a del irpbs enaaTOv avrov rbu drjpi- 
ovpyov dvTenrelv, SeSrjp.ocrMop.eva irov Kara/3e/3Ar^rat 
yeypafx/jieva tu> /3ouAo/xeW padelv. 

GEAI. Ta YlpcoTayopeid fxoi (fyaivei 7repl re 7rd\r)s 
10 kcu tcou dWcov Teyywv e\pr\Kevai. e 

HE. Kc« iroXXwv ye, a> /xaKapie, erepcop. drdp 
8r) to rr}9 dvTtXoyt,Kr)S Te^vrjs dp ovk ev Ke^aXalco 
irepl irdvToav 7rpb? dpjfyio-fiiynqcriv 'iKavr) tls Svvapus 
eoiK elvai ; 



1. iroulv ajxcj).] In the sphere 
of law and justice the Sophist's 
business is rather to enable 
men to dispute than himself 
to hold controversy. 

dfMju(rfir)Tr}TiKovs ] So here 
also the Bodl. MS. 

3. Oi8els yap av] Cf. Theset. 
I78e: tovto ye o-<p68pa vni- 
crxveiTo — 1) ov8els y av avra 
8te\e'yeTO. lb. l6l d. 

5. Ta ye pr)v trepl ivao-a>v\ 
With -repl iraacov must be sup- 
plied a Set Xeyeiv from the fol- 
lowing clause, in which the 
expression becomes more de- 
finite. 

6. 7rp6s eK.ao~Tov\ Probably 

neut. : SC. dpCpia^TjTTjpa. avTov 

implies, They dictate even to 
the masters of each craft. 

7. 8t8rjp.oo~uop.eva — r<5 ftovAo- 

pevw paOeh] " The mysteries 
of each profession are published 
in manuals for all to learn." 



Compare the imaginary case 
put in the Politicus, 299 c : 

ov8eva yap dyvoelv to re laTpiKov 
Kal to vyieivbv ox)8e to KvftepvijTiKov 
Koi vavTiKov' ei-elvai yap to> @ov- 
\opeva pavddveiv yeypap-peva Kal 
■Jarpia edr) neipeva. And for 
KaTafie$kr)Tai, cf. Ar. Eth. Nic. 
I. 3 : Ka'iToi ttoXKoI Xdyoi -rpos 
at)Ta KaTa@e(S\r)VTai. 

9. Ta— -rdXrjs] Diog. Laert. 
9, 8, 55, mentions the treatise 
of Protagoras on wrestling. 
That on rhetoric is mentioned 
in the Phaedrus, 267 c : Upa- 

rayopfia 8e, a> Sco/cpares, ovk r\v 
ToiavTa pevroi aTTa ; 'Opdoeneid 
ye tis, u> 7tih, Kal ciXXa 7roXXa Kal 
Ka\d. 

12. to tt)s dvTiKoyiKTJs rexPTjs] 
" As for the province of the 
controversial art, does it not 
seem," &c. Cf. Rep. 7, 519 b: 

to Tr)s ToiaxiTTjS (pvaecos. Legg. 
3, 683 d : to toii pvdov. 



20<I>12TH2. 



07 



0EAI. <ba'iveTaL yovv (jytftov ovdev v7roXiweiv. 

S*E. 2i> 5?) 7T/0O9 6eu)v, co 7rai, SvvaTOv rjyel tovto ; 
toluol yap dv v/iew fiev o^vTepov 01 veoi irpbs avTo 
/3Xe7roiT€, rjpei? Se dpfiXvTepov. 

0EAI. To 7TOLOV, kou 7rp6s tl paAiaTa Aeyeis ; 
ov yap nov Karavoco to vvv epcoTcopevov. 

S*E. Ei iravra tirLCTTacrOai riva dvOpcoircov earl 
8vvaTov. 

0EAI. MaKaptov pcevT dv tj/jlcov, co tjeve, i]v to 
yevo?. 

HE. TIcos ovv dv 7TOT€ tls irpos ye tov errLCTTa- 
fievov avTos dveTnaTrjpcov cov bwair dv vyies tl 
Aeycov avTenrelv ; 

0EAT. Ovdafim. 

S*E. Ti 7T0T ovv dv eirj to Trjs ao(f)icTTLKrJ9 Svva- 
/x€(0? Oav/xa ; 



I H I 1 1 1 | . , 
Hil.l..' 



3. ogvrepov oi veoi] Cf. Rep. 
595 e : eVel 7roXXa tol of-vrepov 
fiXenovTcov dp(3\i>Tepov opavres 

wporepov el8ov. The young are 
here ironically challenged to 
use their keen eyesight to de- 
termine a difficult question. In 
Legg. 4,715 e, keen mental vi- 
sion is spoken of as the privi- 
lege of age. Nai p.a At", & give, 
naff fj^iKiap yap 6£v ftXeneis. A0. 
Ne'or p.ev yap &v nas avdpanos ra 
TOinvra dp-^Xiirara avTos avTOv 
opa, yepwv 8e o^vrara. For wpos 

avro, cf. Rep. 7, 515 d, e : npos 

to (pa>s — jSXenfiv. 

5. To — daiifxa] " The secret," 
" mystery," as of a juggling 
trick. Cf. Legg. 1, 644 d, 
645 b, d, where man is spoken 
of as a puppet, or magical 
contrivance, of the gods. 
This rendering- of the word 



in the present passage is con- 
firmed by reference to 235 b : 

OVKCT €K(j)ev£fTai TO p.Tj OV TOV 

yevovs eivat. tov tu>v 6avpaTonoia>v 
tis fir. 

6. 011 yap ttov Karavoai] " For 
I do not think I comprehend 
(I suppose I do not compre- 
hend) the drift of your ques- 
tion." 7rco is read in a few 
MSS., and is more pointed, but 
does not seem to be certainly 
right. The vagueness of nov 
consorts well with the puzzled 
tone of Thefetetus. 

7. iravTa eVi'crracr&u] Cf. Eu- 

thyd. 294 c, Ar. Met. 1, 2. 

15. Tt' TTOTS 0-0(p(i)TaTOl] 

" What then can be the mys- 
tery of the Sophist's art?" 

"Why?" 

" I mean, how can they 
create an impression in the 

2, 



In other 
words, [a 
universal 
knowledge 
possible 
for man ? 
J That were 
happy for 
mankind. 
But with- 
out know- 
ledge of 
a subject 
how can 
one dispute 
with those 
•' that know ? 
What then 
can be the 
mystery of 
the So- 
phist's art ? 



6*8 



nAATONOI 



How does 
lie raise the 
baseless 
fabric of a 
belief that 
he is all- 
wise; with- 
out which 
he could 
not hope for 
a disciple 
or a fee ? 



0EAI. Tov 81) irepi ; p. 233. 

HE. Kac? ov TLva rpoirov rrore 8vvaro\ toIs veois h 

ootjav 7rapao~K€vd(JEiv, co? elcri iravra ttolvtcov avroi 

ao(f)o)Taroi. SrjXov yap ay? el porrre. dvreXeyov 6p0(o? 

5 /jL1]T€ iieeivois efyaivovro, (fyaivopevoi re el p.rj8ev av 

p.aXXov e8oKOW 8id rrjv dp.(f)io-fir)Tr}o-iv elvai (fipovip.01, 

TO GOV 8rj TOVTO, CT^oAr) 7TOT OLV OLVTols TL9 \pT)p.aTa 

8i8ovs rjOeXev av tovtcov avrcov pa6r)Tr\s ylyveaOai. 
0EAI. *2,)(oAfj fievr av. 
lo HE. "Nvv 8e y eOeXovaiv ; 
GEAI. Kcu fmXa. 

HE. AoKovat yap, oifiat, irpos Tama e7naTi]p.6vo)s c 
e\eiv uvtoI Trpos direp dvriXeyovaiv. 
GEAI. Flcoy yap ov ; 
15 HE. Apcoai 8e ye tovto wpoy arravTa, <pap.ev : 



minds of the youth, that they, 
and they alone, are in all ways 
the wisest of all men." 

1 . Tov irepi ;] " About what 
point 1 ?" I. e. What is the point 
which a knowledge of his mys- 
tery would make clear 1 

2. Ka#' ov riva] The indirect 
interrogative in a reply, as el 
Travra elbivai just above. For 

iravra, cf. Soph. Antig. 721 : 

(pvvai tov avbpa irdvr eViOTjJ/iijs 
■nkiov. 

Bvvarol] bvvaros, like a£ios, 
seems sometimes to dispense 
with the verb thai, and the re- 
petition of ela\ is thus avoided 
here. 

3. ai T o\] Cf. Theast. 178 e : 

tovto — \mi(T)(yciTO iravrav 8ia<f>e- 
peiv avTos. " The only men." 

5. pf)T€ eKeivois i(paivoPTo\ For 
the ellipse of the infinitive, 
avrCkeyeiv 6p6as, compare Rep. 



4, 430 d : KpeiTToa 8fj avrov (pai- 
vovrai ovk oi8' ovriva rp&nov (sc. 
\eyovres) na\ aXXa arra rotavra 
&anep 'i\vr) avrov Xeyerat. Thuc. 
III. 16 : av€xa>pr}aav — eneibff 
Ka\ eKeivovt eidov. 

el fiT)8ev\ Bodl. €i pr/ prjbev, 
with A and pr. n. 

7. to a6v 8rj tovto] u To quote 
your own observation." 

8. TOVTiOV a\]TO>v\ SC. TOl> O.VTI- 

\eyeiv re <a\ dpcpiafirjTeiv 7rep\ 
TrdvTav : for which rendering 
cf. supr. 232 b : avrov tovtov 
(SC tov avriXoyiKov elvai) StSa- 
a-KaXcv yiyveo~8ai. avrols should 

be repeated with paBrjr. yiyv. 

13. avrol] " They appear (to 
the young man) to be them- 
selves well-inftmned on the 
points on which they dis- 
pute." 

15. Ap5>o-i tovto] Sc. dvrCKe- 
yovaw. 



20M2TH2. 



69 



3- 0EAI. Nat. 

HE. YlavTa apa cro(f)oi tol? paOrjrah (jmivovTai. 
GEAI. Tturjv; 

3<E. Ovk 6vt€S ye' ahvvarov yap tovto ye e(fjamj. 

GEAI. Tlco? yap ovk a&vvarov ; 5 

S"E. AotjaaTiKr)i> apa tlvol irep\ iravruiv einaTr]- 
firjv 6 ao(piaTT)9 rjfjuu, aAA' ovk aXijdeiav eywv avair'e- 
<PavTat. 
d GEAI. YlauraTracrt fxev ovv. Ka\ KtvSvvevet ye to 
vvv elpr/fievov opdorara wept avrcov elprjordai. io 

SE. Aaftoopev tolvvv aa(peo~Tep6v n 7rapd8ety/JLa 
7repl tovtcov. 

GEAI. To irolov 8r} ; 

££E. To6V. /ecu p.oi 7reipco Trpoo-e\(x)v top vovv ev 
fxaXa a-KOKpivaaOai. 15 

GEAI. To irolov ; 

HE. Eft Tis (pair) fir) Xeyew /jayo* avTiAeyeiv, aAAa 



This unreal 
appearance 
of universal 

wisdom is 
the phe- 
nomenon 
which we 
have to 
consider. 



6. Aotjao-TiKT]v] " A know- 
ledge which is in appearance 
only." fio£a is here opposed to 
a\T)6eia, as appearance to reality. 
Cf. infr. 268 c: to ttjs bogao-TiKTjs 
mfjLTjriKov. There is, however, an 
allusion to the other (subjec- 
tive) meaning of 86£ja ( = opin- 
ion) as Opposed to emo-Tr)pr) 
(cf. Theset. 207 c, 208 e), just 
as the word akrjdeia is probably 
used with reference to the 0X17- 
6eia (or certainty) of Protago- 
ras. Compare the confusion 
of the two meanings of dvorjros, 
noticed by Mr. Grote in Parni. 
132 c, Phsed. 80 b. Grote's 
Plato &c, ii. 272, note p. 

9. to vvv — elprjoSai^ Cf. 
Theeet. 186 e: Kal pdXiard ye 
vvv KarcKpaveo-Tarov yeyovcv aX\o 



bv alaBrjo-ecos e'nco-Trjpr). 

1 4, 7rpoo~e)(a>v tov vovv ev pdXa] 
" Giving me your very closest 
attention." For the position of 

ev pdXa, cf. Phsed. 1 1 6 e : deinvrj- 
o-avrds re Kal iriovras ev pdXa. 
For Kai introducing an impera- 
tive, cf. Theret. 145 d, Kal fioi 
Xeye alib. ; and compare the 
use of Kai fjioi Xeye (or dvayv&dt) 
to ^(pio-pa &c. by the orators. 

17. Xe'yew] Sllbaudi enio-Ta- 

o-6ai. The same illustration 
which is used here to depre- 
ciate the Sophist is applied 
to the poets in Rep. 10, 596 c : 

'AXX' opa 8t) Ka\ rov8e riva KaXels 
tov 8i]piovpyov. Tov nolov ; *Oy 
irdvra iroie'i, oaanep eis emo-ros 
t5>v x fl P 0T( X v * >v *• T - ^- HdW 
6avpaar6v — Xeyeis o-o(piOTr]V. 



70 



nAATftNOS 



Imagine 
a parallel 

case. Sup- 
pose IIIK' t>> 

profess, not 
that he 
knows, but 
that he can 
create all 
things : 
men, ani- 
mals, the 
sea, the 
heaven, 
the Gods. 



TroLelv koll 8pdu pid r^x v V ^vdiruvra ewtaraaOai p. 233 
Trpayfiara. 

0EAI. Ilwy iravra etVey ; e 

HE. Ttjv apxh v T °v pv]@zvT09 (TV y rjpiv ev6v? 
5 dyvoeis' to. yap ^vpiravra, a>? eot/ca?, ov fiavOdvus. 

GEAI. Ov yap ovv. 

HE. Aeyco to'lvvv ere kcu e'/xe twv 7rdvrcou, Kal 
Trpoy rjfiLP rdXXa £coa Ka\ 8ev8pa. 

0EAI. Um Aeyet? ; 
10 (HE. Ei rt^ e'/ue /cat ere /cat raAAa 0ura irdvTa 
7roirj(T€Li> (f)a[r). 

0EAI. TtVa 5?) Xeycou ttju iroiiqcriv ; ou yap 8rj 
yewpyov ye epeh rivd' Kal yap (cocov ovtov emes P« 234 

7TOLT]Tr)V. 

<5 3?E. ^tyfu, /cat 777)0? ye OaXdrrrj^ [/cat 777c-] /cat 
ovpavov Kal Oecoi/ Kal tcou a\\a>v ijv/JL7rduT(oi>* Kal 
Toivvv Kal ra)(y 7roir)cra$ avrwv eKaara irdvv a/iLKpov 
i/Ofx[(rfjLaro9 aVooYcWat. 



Compare Emped. Fr.13 4-141: 
a>s 8 oirorav ypafpees — Kai re 6e- 
ovs 8o\i)(aia>vas rififjai (pepicrrovs. 

I. fhjvarravra — ^v/xnavraj 
Note the variety. 

4. Tr)v dpxhv] " The very key 
to ray meaning is unknown to 
you. You do not understand 
what I mean by All." 

7. Aeyco — tS>v Tvdvrav\ Cf. 
Rep. 5, 398 C : eya — Kivhvvevat 
euros t£>v Trdvrav eivai. 

IO. Kal raXka (pvraj The no- 
tion of cpvra need not include 
efie Kai ve, according to a well- 
known Platonic use of o'XXos, 
e. g. Ale. II2b: rois re 'Axalois 
Kal rols aXXots Tpwcriv : with 

which compare Horn. Od. 2, 
43. But the word is probably 



used here in the widest sense 
( = creatures) ; cf. Tim. 90 a : 

<as ovras fjpds (pvrov ovk eyyeiov 
dXX' ovpdviov. Rep. 6, 49 1 d : 
-rravrbs (mepfiaros ivepl rj (pvrov 
e'ire ra>v iyyeimv e'ire ra>v £w(ov. 
Theag. 121b. 

12. \eyu>v\ Sc. (pair] civ. 

15. <$>T]p.i] "Yes." Cf. Phsedr. 
270 c. 

Kal yrjs] These words oc- 
cur only in two MSS., Ven. S. 
and Flor. i, which however 
belong to different families. 
They are not absolutely re- 
quired, for the earth as well 
as the sun may be included in 
the expression ko.1 8e5>v. But 
cf. Rep. 10, 596 d : Kal irpbs 

rovrois yrjv Ka) ovpavov Kal deovs. 



20M2TH2. 



71 



>. 234« 0EAI. Wouhiav Aeyei? riva. 

HE. TV he ; •n)j> roO XeyovTOS otl ttolvtol olhe Kal 
raura erepou av hiha^eiev oAlyov kou ev oXiyw ^povco, 
fxiov ov iroubiav vop.Lo~Teov ; 

GEAI. ndl>TC09 7TOV. 5 

b HE. YlcuSia? he e\eL$ rj n TeyyLKWTepov ?) kou 
XapieaTepov ethos y to /iLpiyTLKOi/ ; 

GEAI. Ovhapco?' irapnroXv yap elprjKas eiho? els 
ei> TravTa ^vkXaftcov kou ax^hou irotKiXoiTaTov. 

HE. Ovkovv rov y v7na\vovp.evov hvvaTov eivanc 
pua Teyyri iravTa iroielv yiyvcoo-Ko/nev tvov tovtoi/, otl 
fM/JLrj/JLaTCL kou 6p.coi>v/JLa tcov ovtcov airepyatppevos tyj 



2. Ttjv tov \eyovros] Sc. Tex v 1 v - 

Compare Coleridge, Friend, 
vol. iii. p. 145 : "For the 
ancients, as well as the mod- 
erns, had their machinery for 
the extemporaneous mintage of 
intellects, by means of which, 
off-hand, as it were, the scholar 
was enabled to make a figure 
on any and all subjects, on any 
and all occasions." 

4. p.wv ov 7rai8iav vop.io~reov\ 

Cf. Euthyd. 278 c: nai8iav 8e 

\eyco 81a. ravTa, on, el Kal 7roXXa 
tis rj Kal TravTa ra roiavra fiddoi, 
ra pev irpdypara oi8ev av paXXov 
el8elrj nfi e'xei, irpocrTrai^eLV 8e olds 
t av e'trj rols dvdpurtvcos. Legg. 
2, 66*] e : Kal irai8idv ye ttjv 
ai)Ti)v ravrtjv Xeya Tore orav pyre 
Ti. (SkaTTTy prjre a>(pe\{j aTrov8rjs fj 

\6yov agiov. The contempt for 
the art of painting which is 
here expressed reappears in 
Legg. 6, 769 b : ivrpi^ — ov- 

8ap.ws ye'yova rfj roiavrj] Te\vr] . 
— Kal ov8ev ye efikdftj}?. See 
also Polit. 277 C : ypacprjs 8e 
Ka\ (Tvpira(TT]s ^eiponpyi'as \e£ei 



Kal Xoyw 8t]\ovv nav £cbov pdWov 
Trpeivei rols 8vvapevoi<; e-rrea-Oai. 
6. TexyiKtorepov xapieo-re- 

pov] " More artful," and there- 
fore more worthy of the So- 
phist ; " more amusing," and 
therefore more deserving of 
the name naiSid. Cf. Polit. 
288 c, where piprjTiK-q is in- 
cluded under mdyviov. 

8. 7rajnrroXv] " Most exten- 
sive." Lit. "abundant." Cf. 
infr. 236 b. 

9. 7TOlKi\a)TaTOV ] " Most 

various." Cf. Theset. 146 d : 
TroiKiXa dv8' dnXov. 

1 1 . yiyvaHTKopev irov tovtop] 

tovtov, although the reading of 
only two MSS. (Par. H. Flor. 
b), is certainly preferable to 
tovto, because adding point to 
the parallel : and has been 
introduced into the text by 
Stallbaum. The same reading 
had previously been conjec- 
tured by Van Heusde. 

12. Spuvvpa] Cf. Parm. 133 
d : ra — nap' i]piv ravra, opwvvpa 
ovra e\eivois. 



We should 
understand 

at once 
that he is 
a painter, 
and that 



72 



nAATQNOS 



his arc 

only mimic 
" crea- 
tions ;" by 
which, 
however, 
he can im- 
pose from 
a distance 5 
on the less 
intelligent 
amongst 
young 
children. 
There is 
also a 
mimic art 
of reason- 
ing, by IO 



ypa(f)iKr) T€)(i>r) Swaros earaL tov? uvoi]tovs tcou viwv p. 234 
iraiSoov, iroppmdev rd yeypappeva hriBeuaws^ XavOd- 
veiv, cu?, o ti 7rep av ftovXrjOfj Spav, tovto 'ikolvcotoltos 
cov diroTeXelv epycp. 

0EAI. Ylco? yap ov ; 

SiE. TV 8e 8/] ; irepl tov? Xoyov? dp ov irpoaBo- 
Kwp.€v elvai twcl aXXr/v re^vrju ; j-rj °V"f Swarbv av 
Tvyyaveiv tov? vkov? /cat en Troppco tmv irpaypLaroav 
Trj? dXr/OeLa? d(peo~TU)Ta? 81a tQ>v cotwu toi? Xoyoi? 
yorjTevetv, SeiKvvvTa? etScoXa Xeyofieva wept 7rdvT(x>v 9 



2. iroppa&ev — afacrrcoTas] Ct. 
*. I, 663 b : (TKOToSiviav 8e 
to noppooOev 6pa)p.evov iracri re a>s 
eirog elireiv nal 8tj kcu toIs natal 
napex". The spirit of Prot. 314b 
is the same : rj^ls yap en veoi, 
(bare toctovto irpaypa 8ie\eo~dai. 

Cf. also Kep. 1, 331 e : &o-nep 

fjdr) eyyvrepoy &>v rav ocei fidWov 
ti KaQopa avrd. 

7. nva aXXrfv Texvrjv] roiavr-qv, 
which Heindorf proposed to 
insert before rexvrjv, is found 
in C. H. c, and has been 
added by a recent hand in 
two other MSS. But with 
roiavTT] following (infr. d), the 
common reading is more pro- 
bable. 

+ »7 oi+] The reading of 
most MSS., 17 ov Swarov av 

rvyxdveiv, is awkward unless 
Toiavrijv is added above, ov 
may possibly have arisen from 
aZ following. The translation 
of Ficinus (qua seductores — 
adolescentulos decipere vale- 
ant) points to Schleiermacher's 
conjecture, T] bvvarbv av rvyxd- 
veiv, which is also supported 
by a correction of the Coisli- 



nian MS. (fj Bvvarov.) (fj ov 
n.) For rvyxdveiv with the ad- 
jective, cf. Tim. 61 d, rvyxdvet 
— raiira — Sward "hex^^vai, and 

seven other passages quoted 

by Ast, Lex. S. V. rvyxdvco. 
And for the infinitive after the 
relative #(subaud. ivpoo-boKa>pev), 

cf. Parm. 130 e : thai e'idr) cirra, 
S>v rate — ras inavvp-ias i'cr^ftv. 

8. tovs veovs Ka\ en iroppco] 
A similar parallel is drawn 
between rhetoric and tragic 
poetry in Gorgias 502 d : Nw 

cipa 17/xety evprjKapev prjTopiKrjv 
nva Trpbs brjpov toiovtov oiov irai- 
8cov re 6/j.ov Kal yvvaiKcov Kal 
dv8pa>v, Kal 8ov\a>v Kal i\ev6epa>v, 
rjv ov irdw dydpeda, koXokiktjv yap 
avrrjv (ttjv tt)s rpaycodias iroirjcnv) 
qbapav eivai. See also ib. 458 
e, where the " omniscience" of 
the rhetor is noticed : wepl 

irdvTcov (prjTopiKOv) war iv o^Xw 
iridavbv ehai. Ib. 459 b: 6 ovk 
el8u>s tov etSdroy iv ovk el86ai 
TTidavcoTepos. Compare Legg. 
2, 658 C : il p.ev tolvvu Ta ap,iKpa 
Kpivoi iraihia, Kpivovo~i tov rd dav- 
p.ara inideiKVvvTa. 

IO. ei'SaXa Xeyopeva] .■= rd iv 



2()<I>I2TH2. 



73 



p. 234. Q)0~T€ 7T0L€LV dX^Ovj 8oK€W Xey€(T0UL KCU TOV XtyOVTU 

Srj ao(j)(OTaToi> irdvToov uttolvt civcti ; 

d 0EAI. TV ydp ovk av eiq aXXrj tls roiavri] 
rexyrj ; 

S*E. Tov? ttoAAow ovu, J^coJ QtalrrjTe, rwv Tore 
olkovovtcov dp ovk dvdyKi^ XP^ V0V T€ zttcXOovtos 
avTois LKauov kou 7rpoiovcrr)s rjXiKias, tols re overt 
TrpocnriiTTOVTas eyyvOeu koll did iraO^jidroiv uvayKa- 
{ppevovs evapyws efydirTeaOai rcov optcov, perafidX- 
Xeiv tol9 rore yevopievas Soijas, cocrre apuKpd p}v 
<j)aivecr6ai rd pteydXa, ^aXeird 8e rd pdSia, kcll irdvra 

e Travrrj dvarer pd(pOai rd iu rol? Xoyois (^avrdo-para 
vwo twv iv tolls irpa^ecriv epyu>v irapayzvopiviov ; 



rots Xoyois (pavraa-para, infr. e. 
" Exhibiting fictitious argu- 
ments, as the painter exhi- 
bited fictitious shapes." There 
is a stress on \eyopeva as op- 
posed to yeypappeva emdeiKPvs 
above. Compare Theset. 150 e : 

yJAevSrj Koi ei'ftcoXa ivepl irXeiovos 
iroirjcrapevoi rod akrjBovs. For 
the plural SeiKvvvTas, to which 
objection has been made, cf. 
Theast. 172 b: edeXovcrcv Icrxv- 
pi£ecrdat. lb. 1 67 b : 8oga£ovras 
avyyevrj eavTtjs, and notes. 

i. Trotelv — 8oi<elv] " To make 
them think." 

5. Tovs 7ToX\ovs — 7rapayevo- 
ixevav] " Is it not then, Theee- 
tetus, inevitable, that most of 
the auditors of such lectures 
in process of time, as they get 
older, coming into close con- 
tact with realities, and being 
compelled by sad experience 
to see and feel things as they 
are, will change the opinions 
which were then created, so 



that what seemed great will 
appear small, and what seemed 
easy, difficult ; and the ima- 
ginations, awakened by dis- 
course, will be completely 
overturned by the facts which 
encounter them in action." 

[S>] emiTrjre] The Bodl. 
omits S> with An. 

8. 81a 7m6T)pdr(ov] According 

to the " rpiyepcov pvdos," 7ra6i)- 
para padrjpara. 

9. evapyas] " To come into 
unmistakeable contact with re- 
ality." 

10. crpiKpa — ra peyaXa] E.g. 
wealth, distinction, &c. 

11. xaAe7ra — ra pabut] E.g. 

the government of men. 

13. vtto roiv iv rais irpa^cnv 
epycov Tvapayevopevcov] "The reali- 
ties which have encountered 
them in action." Compare the 
complaint of Adimantus in Rep. 
6, 487 b, c. And cf. Legg. 6, 

769 d : irpo'iovTos tov xp^vov, koi 
tcov 8o£('wtcov f'py<p Tteipcopevov. 



Whirl, 

youth and 
inexperi- 
ence iii.iy 
be de- 
ceived, 

for long 



74 



riAATONOS 



TheaRtetus 
assents, 
i bough he 
feels thai 
he is still 
one of those 
"at a dis- 
tance" 
from the 
truth of 
things. 
Str. "It is 
our endea- 
vour to 
anticipate 
experience 
and to 
draw you 



0EAI. '0? yovv efjioi TT)XtK(h8e ovn Kplvat. cu'/xcu p. 
8e kcu €fie ru>v eri iroppcdOev ucjjecrTrjKOTCou eivai. 

aE. Toiyapovv r)i±eis ae otSe iravres neipaaofieOa 
Kai vvv 7reipu)/i€0a &>? iyyvrara avev roiv 7raOrjpdrcov 
hTrpocrayeiv. 7rep\ <5' ovv rod crocpiaTov rode /uloi Xeye' 
iroTepov rjSr) tovto croupe? on tcov yorjToov eari tl?, p. 

fli/X1]T1]9 OJV TCOV OVTOJV, 7] diaTatfifieV 6TL fir) 7T6/01 

ocrcovTvep dvTiXeyeiv Sokcl 8vvolto? eivai, 7rep\ toctov- 
tcov kcu ra? eirxTTrjiias dX-qOcos k\cov Tvyyava ; 
i0 0EAI. Kcu 7tco? dv, co ije've ; dXXd ayebov rfSr) 
aa(j)€? €K tcov elprj/xevcov on tcov tyjs 7rou8ia9 fxere- 
\ovtcov earl n? fiepcov. 



lb. 10, 888 b : & nal, veos 
ef, npoicov 8e ae 6 xpovos 7rotrjaei 
iroXXa hv vvv §o£d£ei? peTafta- 
\6vra eirl rdvavria Tideadai. 

I. 'Cls epol — Kplvat = as epol 

Kpirfj. The infinitive is epexe- 
getic. 

3. Toiyapovv r)pels ae o"i8e\ 
Cf. Legg. IO, 905 c : ravra el p,ev 
ae ire'idei Kkeivlas o8e ko.1 ^vpnaaa 
rjpwv r]8e r) yepovaia, Kakas av aoi 
Kai 6 debs avTbs £-vWap(Sdvoi. 

impels otSe] = {-evos, Qe68a>pos, 
2a>KpaTr]s. 

4. tSjv TradriixaTav] The article 
refers to 81a Tvadrjparav above. 

5. 0' ovv] " But, to return." 
7. prj expresses that an af- 
firmative answer to the question 
which it introduces is regarded 
as possible. 

I 2 . earl, tis pepav] Heindorf 
objects to p.epcbv on the ground 
that the only way of constru- 
ing the words as they stand is 
to suppose p-epuv to be go- 
verned by perexovrmv. " That 
he is one of those who par- 
take of the divisions of child's- 



play." But why may not the 
words be taken more simply? — 
"That he occupies (lit. is) one of 
the departments which partake 
of the nature of child's-play." 
The confusion of the man and 
his function, the juxtaposition 
of the masculine with the femi- 
nine and neuter, has already 
occurred several times in this 
dialogue, e. g. 225 a : to xPV- 

panariKov yevos, ipi.aTiK.rjs ov 
Texvrjs, — early — 6 ao(piarr)s. 
The article in ttjs 7rai8ias re- 
fers to p. 234 a : 7rai8iav — 
7ratSta?. Accordingly, tcov ttjs 

7ratoids perexovToov pepav IS 

equivalent to tS>v tt)s pipT)riKr)s 
pepwv. That pipr/TiKT] is divided 
into many parts is implied 
supr. 234 b, els ev iravTa gvWa- 
/3fflv, and in the epithet ttoiki- 
\ararov. Cf. also infr. C : Kara 
peprj rrjs pipr}TiKr)s. 235 a: ttjs 
pipr/TiKrjs to eiil tovtco pepos. 
lb. b : ttoXv tovto to p.epos Kara 

— p,ipr]TLKrjv. The conjecture 
ets, adopted by the Zurich edi- 
tors (earl tis pepav els. Totjtu), 



2CXM2TH2. 75 

p. 235. HE. Ely yoijTa ptev 81) Ka\ piiprjTrji/ apa OeTeov 



0EAI. IlcSy yap ov OeTeov ; 

HE. 'Aye 81], vvv i-jfxlrepov epyov rj8rj tov Orjpa 
b prjKer aveivai' aye8ov yap avTov irepieiki^apiev evb 

ap.({)l(3Al1(TTpiKCp Tivl TCOV ev TOIS \6yOl9 7Tepl TO. 

roiavra opyavcov, coare ouk€t eK(pev£eTai Tooe ye. 

0EAI. To ivoLov ; 

HE. To /uly] ov tov yevovs elvai tov tcov OavpiaTo- 
ttoicov Ti? eh. *< 

GEAI. Kdpiol tovto ye ovtco irep\ avTov ^vv8oKel. 

HE. Ae8etKTai tolvvv o tl Ta^iaTa 8iaipeiv rrjv 



But what 

□ 

he not ;t 

mimic and 

a maker 

I 



though involving only a slight 
change, is unmeaning and gives 
a wrong emphasis. The case is 
different below (235 b : ns els), 
where the point is that he cannot 
escape being some one amongst 
the varieties of the genus jug- 
gler. Here naiSias is the em- 
phatic word. 

The next words, els yorjTa, 
admit of a similar explanation. 
The masculine noun is substi- 
tuted for the neuter of the kind 
or genus. He must be referred 
to the genus sorcerer, and to a 
species of mimic. Cf. Polit. 
281 C : irorepov ovv 6 nepl ttjs 

ixpavTiKrjs Adyo? Ixaveos corral 

ftiG>pi.o~pevos, eav ap' airrjv twv 
eTTipekeiav, OTrocrai ivep\ rrjv epedv 
ia6rjTa, els ttjv KaXKlarrjv kcu 
peylarr^v Tracrcov ridapev ; where, 

however, the Zurich editors 
have elal, but see note. Legg. 

9, 867 b : els eluova pev ap(pco 
Belvat. Tim. 57 e : els dvcopaXo- 
TTjra ridapev. For a similar use 
of the concrete for the ab- 



stract, cf. Rep. 382 d : IloiTjTr]s 

apa yjsevbrjs ev Bern ovk. evi. 

i. yorjTa] So the art of 
the Xoyo7rotot is described in 
Euthyd. 289 e : eVn — ttjs rav 
eTTcpdap Te%vr]s popiov o~piKpa> tl 
eKeivrjs vnoSeearepa. 

4. vvv rjperepov — aveivai] The 

near approach made in these 
words to an anapaestic tetra- 
meter can hardly be accidental. 
And there is a tone of bur- 
lesque tragedy in the order of 
the words. 

6. dp<fiil3\r](rTpiKcp tivl] Sc. 
dpydva, viz. the eiSos of piprj- 

riKrj in which we have confined 
him. Cf. Euthyd. 302 b : ano- 
pov rtva <TTpo<fir)V e(pevyov re Kal 
eaTpe(p6pr]V rjSrj, aonep ev olktvco 
elXijppevos. 

10. tis els] Some one or other 
of those included in the race 
of jugglers. Cf. Soph. Antig. 
262 : els yap rts fjv emcrTos 
ovtjeipyao-pevos. 

12. AedeiKrai tolvvv] Sc. 8eu>. 
Cf. Theset. 197 a : tovtov t 



76 



nAATONOS 



It bo, we 

must take 
the art of 
image- 
making 
and pro- 
c< ed \\ iili 
our method 
of dr\ i- 
sions. 



ei8oj\o7roiLK7]v Te^iju, koll KaTafidvTas els avTr^v, iai> p. 235. 
/xeV i]fAas tvOvs 6 ao(j)icrTi)? VTrofielvrj, avAAa(3eli> 
avrov Kara ra e7rearaXp.eva imo rov (BacriXiKOv 
Xoyov, KUKelvcp napahovras diro^vac rrjv dypav' c 

5 edv <5' dpa Kara p.epr) rrj? pup.rjrLKrjs' Bvtjtou 7rr), £vva- 
KoXovOelv aura), Siaipovvra? del rrjv VTrobeyop.evr)v 
avrov ptoipav, ecoarrep dv Xr}(j)6r}. rvdvrais ovre ovros 
ovre dXXo yevos ovdev p.r) irore eKfpvyhv errev^qrai 
ri]u rcov ovrco Svvap-evcov \xerievai kol@' eKacrra re koll 

loeVt iravra peOodov. 



av e'tpr] a7re)(e(T6ai, and note. 
Isocr. Nicocl. 36 : cprjpl 8fj 

TTpaTTUv eKaaTOv f]jj.a>v eVt/xeXws'. 

AedoKTcu, the reading of some 
MSS. and of the old editions, 
agrees well with the preced- 
ing context, but not so well 
Avith the new matter in what 
follows. Compare Kep. 4, 432 b : 
vvv Sj) rjpas Set axTTrep Kvvrjyhas 
Tivas dupvov TrepucrTacrdat., nvpo- 
cre)(OVTa<i rov vovv prj ttj] dia(pvyrj 
rj 8a<aio(TvvT] Kal d(pavt.o-$eiaa ci8r]- 
Aos yivrjrai. 
(i 2.) Ae'SeiKrat — /ze#o'8oi/]"Then 

the duty is proved of opening 
Avith all speed the art of image- 
making, and descending into 
it ; where, if we find the (So- 
phist immediately awaiting us, 
we must apprehend him in 
the name of Eeason, who is 
our royal master, and render 
and declare our capture ; but 
if he lurk in one of the many 
compartments of imitative art, 
we must follow him closely, 
always opening the cell which 
contains him, until he be 
caught. Surely neither he nor 
any other kind shall boast 
of having eluded the pursuit 



of those who are able thus to 
follow the most minute and 
also the most comprehensive 
inquiry." 

1. elScoXoTTouKT] is synony- 
mous with pipt]TlKT]. 

2. irropelvrj 8vr]Tai\ He is 

imagined as a flying enemy 
who may either turn to bay or 
hide himself in the bush. 

3. vno rov (HaaiXiKov Aoyou] 
Compare Pindar's vopos navrmv 
paaikevs. For Custom, as the 
king of men, Plato would sub- 
stitute Eeason ; vovs for vopos. 

4. aTToffivai rrjv aypav\ See 

the story of Polycrates and the 
fisherman in Herod. III. 42. 

J. irdvrws ov\ Polit. 269: rrdv- 
ra>s ov rroWa eK(pevyeis Traidias errj. 

8. oi — pr] noTe eKCpvyov enev- 
ijrjTai] This sounds like an echo 
of Soph. (Ed. Col. 1024: ovs 

ov ur) rrore ^copa? (pvyovres ttjo-8' 
eTrev^covrai Oeo'is. See oiiceT in- 

(pevgerai supr., and cf. Legg. 

IO, 900 a : ov pr) irore eirev^r/rat 
irepiyeveadai 6eav. II). 12, 969 
b : to ye dvbpeioraros eivat 80- 
Kelv — ova incpev^ei irore. 

9. naS" e/cacrra — iravra] Pass- 
ing over no kind and extend- 



20<I>I2TH2. 



77 



re i a 



p. 235. 0EAI. Aeyei? ev, /ecu tclvtcl ravrj) iroLi]Teov. 

SE. Kara dr/ tov 7rapeXt]Av6oTa Tpoirov tij? 8lul- ti 
d peaetos eycoye jjlol kcll vvv (j)alvopaL 8vo Kadopu.v e\8i] appu 
tt)s pip->]TiKi]9 Ti]v oe (r]Tovpevr)v Loeav, ev oiroTepo) 
iroO* rjplv ovaa Tvyyavei, KarapLaOeiv ovSe7rco p.0L$ 
8okco vvv 8vvoltos eirai. 

0EAI. 2?) <5' aAA' ei7re irpcoTov kcll 8leXe rjplv 
rive to) 8vo key as. 

£;E. Wllav /jl€V ti~jv eiKaarLKrjv bpcov ev avrrj The for- 

1 » m <•/ /. f / v v mer, whicli 

Teyyr\v. ecrTL o avTrj jiaAicrTa, oiroTav Kara ra? tov 10 W e may 

^ / / , / \ , r call a like- 

Trapaoeiy holtos avp^peTpLas tis ev p.7]K€i kcll irAarei n ess, is 

v Q //, \ n / y / j 5, in \ that in 

kcll pat/ei, kcll irpos tovtols erL yjpcopaTCL airooLOovs wn i c h the 

\ / «/ \ ~ / / propor- 

e tcl 7rpoai]Kovra e/cacrrcuy, tijv tov pipLrjpLaros yeveaLv tj ons and 

> t y colours of 

airepyaip-jTaL. the original 

0EAI. Ti 8'; OV TTOLVTeS o\ pLlpLOVpevOL TL TOVT 15 pressed. 

eiTL)(eLpovaL 8pav ; 

£?E. Ovkovv ocroi ye tcov peydXcov ttov tl irXar- 
tovctlv epycov rj ypd(f)ovo-LV. el yap ci7ro8L8olev ttjv 



ing to all : at once special and 
general, individual and univer- 
sal. Compare Phaadr. 265-273. 
7. 2u 8' aXX' eiVe] Cf. Xen. 

Hell. III. 4, 26 : ArroKpivopevov 
8e tov 'AyrjaiXdov, on ovk ay 
TvoirjCTiu ravra civev ra>v o'Ikoi 
re\£>v, 2u 5' aX\a, ecos av irv6y 
ra irapa rrjs TroXeas, fiera^coprjcrov 
e<pr], es TtjV <&apvaj3d£ov. 

g. n)v eiKao-TLK7]v] The word 
is used again in Legg. 2, 667 b: 
ocrai rex vai clKtUTTuau. lb. 668 
d : povo~ini)v — Traadv cpapev elua- 
o~riKrp> re eivai K.a\ piprjri^v. 

0. 6pcbv\ ra) 8110 Xeya IS 

understood from the preceding 
sentence. The ace. is governed 
partly by Xe'yco, partly by 6p£>v. 
r 13. t*}v tov piprjparos ykveo~iv\ 



The word yepeo-is frequently 
occurs in these dialogues with 
something of a technical mean- 
ing. Here it seems almost 
pleonastic. Cf. Legg. 4, 712 

a : rore TToXire'ias rijs cipiCTTTjs 
cpverai ysvecris. Rep. 2, 37 I d : 
Ka7TT]\a>v — yeveaiv. Compare 
Cratyl. 432 c, where the fur- 
ther distinction is drawn be- 
tween KparvXov ei/cwj/ and 8vo 
KparvXoi. 

15. 7rai/Te? ol pipovpevol ri] 

" All who try to imitate any- 
thing." 

16. iTTixtipovcri Spav almost = 

bpSxri. Cf. Theaet. 196 d, Phsedr. 
265 e, et passim. 

17. irov\ "Anpvhere," "on 
any occasion." 



78 



nAATONOS 



The false 
image is 
that, in 
whichthese 

only seem 
to be lire- 
served, be- 
cause of 
the posi- 
tion of the 
spectator. 



tcov kciXcov dXijOivijv avp/JieTpiav, oia&' on a/JLiKpo- p. 235. 
repa fxev tov Se'ovTO? ra dvco, p.el(oo Se ru Karoo p. 236. 
(f)aii>OLT dv Sid to to. /xev TvoppobQev, to. 8 eyyvOev 
v(fi rjpicov bpdaOai. dp ovv ov yaipeiv to dXr/Oh 
5 eacravTes 01 Srjpiiovpyol vvv ov tols ovaas avfipie- 
Tpia?, dXXd tos dofjovaas elvai koAo? rois eiScoXois 
evonrepyd(pvTai ; 

0EAL Yldvv fxev ovv. 

/HE. To fxev dpa erepov ov Sikciiov, eiKO? ye ov, 
10 eiKova KaXelv ; 

GEAI. No/. 

S*E. Kou 7-779 ye \xipx\i iKr}<$ to eiri tovtco ixepos b 
KXrjreov oirep emo\xev ev tco 7rp6o~0ev, eiKaaTiKTjv ; 

GEAI. KXrjTeov. 
J 5 SE. T/ oY; to (pa.ivop.evov p.ev Sid tt]V ovk e/c 



1. tcov KaXmv] Badham conj. 
kqSKcov, but cf. KaXas infra, 1. 6. 

5. vvv] " In point of fact." 
The position of tlie word is 
curious. Cf. supr., 218 b : 

ap)(op.evco rrpcoTov, cos epo\ cpaive- 
rai, vvv dno tov aocpicrrov. 

ras ovcras] tcov koKcov is pro- 
bably to be supplied in thought. 

8. ndw fxev ovv] These words 
are not omitted in the Bod- 
leian MS., as Gaisford asserts. 

9. et/eds ye ov] ye = are, as 
above, 2 2ic: to ye ovopa tovto 

1 2. to eVl tovto] "Whose work 
this is." Cf. Kep. 5,477 d : 8wd- 
p.ecos 8' els eKelvo fiovov jSAeVeo, 
e(fi' co Te eo-TL Kcil o dnepyd^eTai. 

13. ev tco TrpoaBev] 235 d. 
15. 81a ttjv ovk eK xakov 6iav] 

Heindorf, following Schleier- 
macher, called this reading- 
senseless, and thought that ovk 
had arisen out of ex. And ovk 



is certainly omitted in Coisl. 

2. Y., but Coisl. has e* KaXov 

p.T)8ap.cos. Stallbaum agrees with 
Heindorf, who renders £k Ka- 
Xov, ex loco opportune and 
quotes Aristoph. Thesm. 293 : 

TTOV, TTOV KCtdlfap.' iv KClkcO TCOV 

prjTopcov iv i^aKovoo. C. F. Her- 
mann conjectures 81a ttjv ciko- 
Xovdiav, " because of the con- 
gruity" (it is rather the ap- 
parent congruity) "of the 
proportions." The difficulty 
arises simply from misappre- 
hension. The point is that 
in addressing persons who are 
at a distance from the truth 

of things (jroppco ttjs dXi]delas 
dcpeo-TcoTas, supr. 234 c) the 
Sophist is able to give his 
arguments the appearance of 
wisdom. The unfavourable 
position in which his hearers 
stand is the cause of their 
delusion, as in the case of the 



20<M2TH2. 



79 



p. 236. kolKov 6eav eoiKevai tco KaXco, Svvap.iv Se el tis Xdftoi 
ra rrjAiKczvTa iKavcQ? opav, pr]8e el/eh? cb (prjalv ioi- 
Kevai, tl KaXovptev ; dp ovk, eTreiirep (jmlverai p.ev, 
€OiK€ 8e ov, (pdvrrxafxa ; 

0EAI. T/ pyv ; 

HE. Ovkovv Trd/jL7roXu koll Kara ryv £coypa(f)iav 
c tovto rb fie'pos earl /ecu Kara ^vpuraaav pLip.r)TiKrjv ; 

0EAI. Ilw $ ov ; 

HE. Trjv 8r) (pavrdo-para aAA' ovk etKova direp- 
ya^op.evi]v rey^vqv dp ov (pavTacrTiKrjV opOorar dv 
Trpoaayopevoipev ; 

0EAI. UoXv ye. 

HE. Tovrco to'lvvv tco Svo eXeyov e'lSrj r??? elSco- 
XoTTOUKrji; elKacfTLK-qv Ka\ (pavTacTTLKrjv. 



5 

Hence, 
tli ere are 
two kinds 

of image- 
making, 
Likeness- 
making 
and Plian- 
10 tastic, of 
which 
painting is 
a conspicu- 
ous ex- 
ample. 



apparent proportions of a co- 
lossal statue. The words 86- 

vap.iv 5" e'l tis Aa/3oi ra tt?/W- 
Kavra Uavcos opav imply this, 
and require that ovk should be 
retained. " That which appears 
to resemble what is fair be- 
cause the spectator is not in a 
fair position." Cf. Legg. 2, 
663 c: o-Korobiviav — to iroppaj- 
Qev dpwu.ei'oi/ — irapex el > vop,o6e- 
tt]s 8e — to (tkotos dcpeXcov — 
Treio-ci — cos eo-Kiaypa<pr]p.eva ra 
8'iKaid eort (cat aSi/ca* ra pev d8iKa 
tco tov SiKaiov evavTias (paivopeva, 
Ik pev cISlkou Kal kcikou iauTou 
0ewpouu,eya 7j8ia, ra 8e 8iKaia 
anSea-repa, e< 8e 8iKaiov 7rdvra 
rdvavria iravrr) irpbs dpcfiOTepa, 

where it is evident from the 
context, as here, (especially 
from the word iroppadev,) that 
<fk expresses position or point 
of view : and there is perhaps 
the same allusion as in Ar. 
Eth. Nic. IX. 7 : 'Enlxappos 



p.ev ovv rdx av < / )nt '7 Tavra ~\eyciv 
avrovi £k irovqpov 6ecop.evovs : 
unless indeed this is to be in- 
terpreted from ejusd. Metaph. 
XII. 9, 17 : x a ^ e7rov * K H-*l Ka ~ 
\cos exovrcov \eyeiv koXcos, Kar 
'Enixappov, where sk expresses 
the material or means, as in 
€K Ttov8e it none 1 Phsed. 67 e. 

2 . ra T7]XiKavTa] " Things of 
such colossal size." 

q> (prjcriv eoiKe'vai] " Which 

it professes to resemble." 
3 xa\ovp.ev] Future tense. 

(paiveTat pev\ eoiKevai, which 

is added in one or two 
MSS., is easily supplied from 
eoiKe S' ov. Cf. supr. 233 b : 
P-i]Te eKeivois ecpaivovTo, and note. 

4. <pavTaapaTa] So the Bod- 
leian and IT. : cett. <pdvTacrp.a. 
The opposition between the 
one real and the many appa- 
rent likenesses suits the pas- 
sage well. Cf. Rep. 7, 516 b. 

13. tco 8vo] Supr. 235 d. 



80 



nAATQNOS 



Now in 
seeking to 
place the 
Sophist in 
one of 
these, we 
are en- 
countered 
by the dif- 
ficulty 
which has 
always 
beset the 
subject of 
appearance, 
seeming, 
and falsity. 



GEAI. % Op6m. 

HE. O Se ye koll tot r)/jL([jeyvouvv, ev iroTepa 

tov aocjuaTr)v deTeov, ov8e vvv irco Svvap.cu Qedaa- 

crOcu cracfxa?, aAA' ovtco? OavpaaTos dvyp kcu kcitl- 

5 Selv TrayxaXeiros, eirel kcu vvv paXa ev kcu Kopyj/QJ? 

€1? cnropov eiSos 8iepevvi]aaadai KaTcnre'cpevyev. 

GEAI. "EoiK€i>. 

HE. 'Ap' ovv avTO yLyvcocrKCov £vpL(prjs, y) ere 
olov pvfJLT] ti?, V7TO tov Xoyov crvveiOicrpevov, vvv eire- 
ocnrdcjcLTO irpo? to Tayy tjv/jL<pr)crai ; 

GEAI. YIco?, kcu irpos o tl, tovto e'lprjKa? ; 

aE. ' Ovtco?, co pLaKapie, ecrfiev ev TravTairacTi 

yakeirfi aKe^/ei. to yap cpalveaOat tovto kcll to So- 

Kelv, elvcu Se fir], kcu to Xeyeiv fiev cUttcx, dXrjOrj Se 

1 5 fir), TrdvTOL tcwtcl Ictti [xecrTa chropias de\ ev tco 



p. 236 



2. kcu tot] Supr. 235 d. 
TTOTepa] Bodl. iroTepa. 

6. naTcnv£<pevyev\ The same 
imagery occurs in Phileb. 64 

e : vvv 8rj KaTcnrecpevyev rjp.lv 
t6 dya&ov els ttjv tov koKov 
cpvcriv. Phsed. 76 e : els koXov 
KciTctcpevyei, 6 Xoyoy. The order 
of the words is noticeable. 
Aiepevvrjo-aaOai, which is intro- 
duced by an afterthought, de- 
pends immediately on anopov. 

8. \p" ovv avTo — ] "Do you 
give your assent intelligently, 
or, from the habit of the argu- 
ment, were you now drawn 
on, as by a sort of impetus, 
to assent at once 1" 

9. vvv] This, the reading of 
the Bodleian and An., is better 
than crvve7recrndo-aTo, which has 
arisen out of the preceding 
verb. " Being accustomed by 
the argument to assent, you 



were now (this time) drawn 
on to make a hasty admission." 

11. n«s] "With what mean- 
ing ?" 

Ka\ -rrpbs o ti] " And with 
reference to what ?" " What 
is the special difficulty, which 
you have in viewl" 

o ti] The indirect form 
may be accounted for by sup- 
posing an ellipse of Xeye, and 
appears more natural if the 
words Kal npos oTi are viewed 
as an afterthought. Cf. supr. 
233 a : el iravTa — mO' ovTiva 
k.t.X. Cf. also Legg. 12, 960 
C : npos o ti 8e to vvv av p-qdev 
e'ipr)Tai, (ppaf en cracpeo-Tepov. 
Euthyd. 287b: to yap ovx e'xco 
o ti xpSjLicu o ti 7T0Te Xe'yeis, a> 
Aiovvcrodape ; One MS. (Flor. i) 
has ti. 

15. jieo-Ta] Ora. Bodl. 
A 11. The v of io-Tiv was 



20<M2TH2. 



81 



p. 236. irpoaOev ^povco kcu vvv. ottcos yap eiirovTa ^pi] 
\jsev8r) Xeyeiv tj So{ja(jeiv ovtcos eivai, kou tovto 
(f)0eytjafi€vov ivavTiokoyia fi7] avve\eadai, TravTa- 
p. 237. ttolctlv, (o ©ecar^re, yaXeirov. 
0EAI. T* &$ ; 

HE. TeToXprjK€i> 6 Xoyo? ovtos vTVoOicrOai to /jltj 
ov elvar \jsev8os yap ovk av aXXoos lylyvero ov. Ylap- 
/xevlSrjs Be 6 [leyas, co 7rai, Traicriv jiev \i]plv\ ovaiv. 



first confused with the initial 
p., and then the remaining 
letters ecrra were lost. 

(15.) e" t<5 7Tp6adev xpQ vt ? KCH 
viv] Cf. These t. 187 c : Opdr- 

rei pi 7Tcos vvv re Kal tiXXoTe 8f] 
noKKcLKLS, <o(tt iv diropiq noXXfj 
TTpbs ipavTbv Kill trpbs iiXXov ye- 
yovivai, tl 7TOT cor! tovto to 
nd6os nap' fjp.1v Kal riva rponov 
eyyiyvopevov — to 8o£d£eiv rivd 
yjsev8fj. 

I. 07T0K — xaXe7rdV] " For 
it is most difficult to devise 
an expression by which one 
may say or think that false- 
hoods really exist, and in 
uttering this avoid being in- 
volved in self-contradiction." 
XaXenov (yvcbvai or Xeyai') 0770)5 
(InovTa xph Xeyeiv 17 do£d£eiv 
\f/ev8rj ovtu>s eivai, Kal tovto 
(fideytjdpevov ivavTioXoylq pf] o~v- 

vex^o-Bai. Heindorf, who is 
followed by Stallbaum, inter- 
prets the words differently : 
" Difficile enim prorsus est 
dictu, quomodo oporteat ali- 
quem, qui fieri posse cheat 
(dwovTa) ut falsa quis dicat 
aut cogitet, dum vel hoc pro- 

nuntiat (*ai tovto (fideygdpevov) 

non sibimet ipsum contraria 
proloqui." Snas is here unna- 
turally separated from elirovra : 
xpn is too remote from the 



infinitive o-vvixeo~8ai, and the 
meaning given to Kal is forced. 

For on-coy elnuvra XP*1 Xeyeiv, cf. 
Legg. 4, 709 b : TO 6"' eCTTL — 
■ndvTa TavT tlnovra SoKelv ev 
Xeyeiv. 

3. o-vvexeo-dtu expresses the 
state of distressing uncertainty 
to which the mind .is reduced 
by Eristic. Cf. Theset. 165 c : 

iv (ppiaTi o-vvexopevos. Al". Eth. 
Nic. VII. 3 : 8e8(Tui yap fj 8id- 
voia, orav peveiv pev pfj fiovXrjTai 
81a t6 pfj dpicrKeiv to o-vpirepav- 
6ev, npoievai 8e pf] 8vvrjTai 8id to 
pfj Xvaai e'xeiv tov Xoyov. 

6. 6 Xo'yo? ovtos] Sc. \j/ev8ij 

ovtcos elvai. Cf. Rep. 4, 440 a : 

outos pevToi, ecprj, 6 Xoyos crrj- 
paivei k.t.X. 

8. Traicriv pev [fjpiv] ovcriv, dpxd- 
pevos 8e Kal 8id Te'Xovs] " It was 

in our boyhood that we heard 
him, but he never ceased to 
inculcate the same lesson." 
The Stranger means to inti- 
mate that although he was 
young when he heard Parme- 
nides he had good reason to 
remember this warning, fjp'iv, 
omitted in most MSS., is read 
for pev in a B C i : S, with the 
edition of Stephanas, giving 
also ye for 8e. Hence Bekker 

reads iraio-iv fjplv ovaiv dpxdpevos 
re Kai 81a TeXovs. 



For how 
can we 

afKnii the 
existence of 
these, with 

out contra- 



M 



dieting the 
principle 
which Par- 

nienides 
taught us, 

■' \\ I,:, I is 

not, never 
will be 
found to 
be?" 



82 IIAATQNOS 

apyppevos be kol Sict reXovs tovto uirepapTupaTO, p. 237. 
neCr} re code eKaarore Xeycov kcu pera peTpcov' 

ov yap fxti irore tovt iovSa/xf]^, <p)]rriv, eivai fxt) eovra' 
akXa av tj/o"^' acjj 6S0O Sifyfxevos elpye vorjfia. 

$irap eiceivov re ovv paprvpelrai, /cat paXtara ye brj b 
irdvTcov 6 Xoyo? clutos av dijXcoaeie perpia fiacravL- 



I . tovto dircfiapTvparo'] Sc. 
pr) to pr) ov eivai. " Uttered 

his testimony against this." 

3. tovt ■fov8ap[f\-] The quo- 
tation occurs in the same form 
in the criticism of this passage 
by Aristotle in Met. XIII. 
1089 a (ullo modo, Bessar. 
vers.), with the various read- 
ings 8aprj E., dvvdpei T., pr) 
8aprj Alex. Heindorf's conjec- 
ture, 8afjs, has been adopted 
by the Zurich editors, and by 
Mullach (Fragmenta Philoso- 
phorum), who, however, ex- 
presses a doubt. Wagner, in 
Ehein. Museum, suggested Xd- 
Xrjs. The conjecture iacvf has 
occurred independently to the 
present editor and to Ueber- 
weg, who also suggests 6V 
pf/s. Cf. infr. 250 e : xad' 

dnep av avratv Sarepov e'ire dpv- 
8porepov eire o-acpeaTepov am- 
<J>ateT|Tai, Kcii BaTepov ovtos dfa- 
4>aii/ea0ai. 258 d (where the 
lines are quoted again) : 'Hpe'is 

8e ye ov povov a>s eo~Ti to. pr) ovra 
dne8ei£apev, dXXd Kal to ei8os 6 
Tvy%dvei ov tov pr) ovtos airefyv)- 
vdp.eQo.. lb. e : Mr) to'ivvv r)pds 
e'iirrf tls oti rovvavTiov tov ovtos 
to pr) ov 6.Tzo^>a\.v6p.evoi To'Xpai- 
pev \eyeiv cb? scttiv. lb. a : r) 
QaTepov (pvo-is €$&vr\ TCOV OVTCOV 

ovo-a. Legg. 7, 818 b : oi8e 

6ebs dvdyxr] pr) tvots (pavr/ paxo- 

pevos. Kep. 7, 525 e : pij 



7tot€ (pavjj. Karsten, followed 
by Stallbaum, defends the text 
on the ground that Parmeni- 
des is said to have given the 
maxim both in verse and 
prose. But it is puerile to 
imagine that he spoke verse 
and prose in the same breath, 
or that Plato would quote a 
conversational as part of a 
written utterance. It is cer- 
tainly remarkable that the 
same corruption should be 
found in the copies of Plato 
and Aristotle. 

4. Sitfpevos] This is the 
reading of all the MSS. in 
this place. In the later pas- 
sage, 258 d, where the words 
are again quoted, 8i(,r)pevos is 
read in C. H. and Corr. B. : 

S. has Si^o-tos : the rest 8i£r)- 
o-ios. The latter is probably 
Parmenides' word ; but it is 
possible that Plato may have 
substituted the more prosaic 
8i(r)p(vos for this, as in Theaet. 
173 e, in the quotation from 
Pindar, (peperai is probably 
substituted for 7reVerat. The 
MS. reading is, therefore, re- 
tained in the text. 

6. 6 Xdyos avTos] ovtos Bodl. 
rAHet pr. B. But see Theaet. 
151 a, avTol, and note. The 
variation is probably due to 
6 Xdyos ovtos above. 6 Xdyos, 



20<M2TH2. 



83 



o. 237. adds, tovt ovv avrb wpcDTov 6eacrcope6a, el prj ri 
aoi 8ia(pe'p€i. 

GEAI. To fM€U epbv birrj (BovAei ri6eao i rbv 8e 
\6yov, f) (3e/\Ti(TTa 8t€^eicn, ctkottcov avro? re 16 1 
Kajj.€ Kara Tavrrju Tr\v o8ov aye. 5 

S*E. 'AAAa -%pr] 8pav ravra. kcli pot Xeye- to 
prjSapcos bv roXpwpev ttov (f)6eyyea6ai ; 

0EAI. rTajy yap ov ; 

SE. M77 tolvvv epi8os k'vefca p.r/8e ira&ias, aAA' 
c el o~7rov8fj 8eoi avvvorjcravTa riva airo(^r\vao~6ai twv 10 
aKpoarcou, irol xprj rovvop! imtyepeiv tovto to p.rf ov 



Let us 
calmly 
consider 
this point, 
by analyz- 
ing the 
assertion— 
" Not- 
Beiu" is." 



VIZ. to fj.f] ov eivai. For avros av 

8t]\wo-(u, cf. Theset. 201 a: rax 

&v — qvt6 (fyfjveie to fyrovptvov. 
3. To pev epov 07177 /3ovXei] 

Referring to the courteous 
phrase ei pr] ri aoi Stafa'pei. 
Cf. Rep. 4, 432 b : idv fioi ino- 
peva xPH Ka ' r< * demvvpeva 8v- 
vapevcp KuOopav, Tvdvv perpicos 
Xpwei. And, for SUgeio-i, cf. 
Rep. 6, 484 a : did paKpov twos . 
8ie£e\86vTOS \6yov. 

7. (p6eyyeo-6ai\ " We are not 
afraid to use the expression." 
Cf. Legg. 2, 655 d : tovto— oiff 

oo~iov to irapcmav (pBeyyeadai. 

9. Mfj tolvvv 7ratSia?] Cf. 

Theffit. 155 a: ov 8vo-Ko\aivov- 
Tfs dXha r<5 ovti rjpas civtovs 
e£eTa£ovTes. ib. 1 69 C : kcli poi 
ttclvv Trjpet to Toiovde, prj ttov 
ttuiSikov ti \ddapev elSos Ta>v 

\6yoov Troiovpevot. The words 
here are not ironical, but 
mark the real importance of 
the inquiry. The sentence is 
broken by the introduction 
of the supposition, " Let us 
not put the question in a 
spirit of strife or mockery, 
but suppose one of the hear- 

M 



ers of Parmenides had seri- 
ously to point out, after re- 
flection, to what this name 
Not-Being must be given, 
to what object or kind of 
objects do we imagine he 
would be able himself to ap- 
ply the term, and to direct the 
questioner to do so ?" Par- 
menides is conceived as thus 
questioning one of his hearers 
in defence of his thesis. It is 
also possible to make the first 
clause a part of the supposi- 
tion : " Suppose one of the 
hearers were asked, not in a 
spirit of strife or mockery, 
but in good earnest, to give 
his matured opinion." But the 
sentence when thus rendered, 
though more grammatical, is 
less conversational. Compare 
Phileb. 44 e : Set 8ij <re, & npa>- 
Tapxe, Kaddnep e' ( uoi, kol tovtois 
toIs 8vo-x(palvovo-Lv d-TTOKpiveardai. 

Rep. 7, 516 e. 

IO. dTTO(pr)vaadai] The Bodl., 
with corr. AIJ and pr. BE, has 
drroKpivao-daL, which is probably 
a corruption arising out of the 
Kp in aKpoaTchv. 



84 



OAATONOS 



If Parme- 
nides had 

asked, Of 
what is 
Non-exist- 
ence pre- 
dicable? 
what 
should we 
reply ? 



Certainly 
not of any 



fyeiv 8oKovfj.€i> av els ti kcll hr\ ttolov uvtov re Kara- p. 237. 
\pi)craor6(u koll tco irvvOavofievoy deiKvvvai ; 

GEAI. XaXtwbv rjpov kcu aryebbv ebrelp oico ye 
ejjioi iravTairaaLv airopov. 
5 aE. AAA' ovv tovto ye 8r)\ov, otl tg>v ovtcov 

e7TL TL TO (XT) OV OVK olcTTeOV- 

GEAI. TIcos yap av ; 

HE- Ovkovv eirehrep ovk €7rl to ov, ovS" eVt to 
t\ (pepcov 6p6w av tls (pepoi. 
to GEAI. nm 8j ; 

SiE. Kal tovto rj/jLiv ttov (pavepov, cbs Ka\ to tl d 



1. exeiv] The Bocll. and 
Vat. have ™ : six other MSS. 
oti : Veil. II. ti' ex etv '• ^ e 
other nine have *x&,v. Stall- 
baum has adopted the Bod- 
leian reading, and translates : 
" Quid censemus ? cuinam rei 
et quali designando eum pu- 
tamus et ipsum illud adhibi- 
turum et quserenti demon- 
straturum V But he has not 
satisfactorily accounted for the 
appearance of e'xeiv, which 
makes perfectly good sense. 
For the emphatic position of 
els ti, cf. Prot. 3 1 8 d : 'imvoKpd- 
ttjs — fiekriav aneicri yevojievos Kal 
— eTTidaxrei els ti, &> Upcorayopa, 
Kai nepl tov ; also Polit. 265 
e : 6 7to\itik6s ap enijxeXeiav 
e\ elv <pa'iveTai TTOTepct k. t. A. 

The two next clauses present 
equally curious instances of 
inversion. Cf. alsoLegg. 6, 776 

d : els a Kal Travra rot roiavra 
(B\e\fsavTas rjpas ti XPI iroieiv 
Ttepl KTrjO-ecos oltceraiv ; 

2. beiKvvvai] Sc. ins XP €lr l 
emcfiepeiv. 

5. 'AAX' ovv tovto ye] I. e. 

to whatever else the term p.rj 



ov may be referred, it cannot 
be to any existing thing. 

tSjv ovtcov eni ti ] The 
reading of Ven. II. and seven 
other MSS. The Bodleian 
has enT . 

8. ovcf em to t\ cpepcov] Cf. 
for similar examples of ex- 
treme analysis, Parm. 161 a : 

el 8e to ev eKelvo Kai p.rj aWo 
xiTTOKelTai fxrj elvat Kal tov eKeivov 
Kal aWcov ttoWcov dvdyKT] avTco 

P-erelvai. Theset. 1 57 b, 202 a. 
Also Parm. 164 b: rl 8e ; to 

eKeivov rj to eKeivco, rj to ti fj to 
tovto rj r6 tovtov, r) aXXov fj 
aXhco, rj TTore rj eireiTa rj vvv, 
rj eirio~Tr)fj.rj r) 86£a fj a'io~8r)0~is rj 
Xoyos rj ovopa rj ciXXo otiovv t£>v 
ovtcov nepl to p.r) ov e(TTai ; 

which, however, is rather par- 
allel to the next dnopia. 

1 1. Kai tovto rjplv ttov (pavepov\ 
" This also is surely plain to 
us." Kal refers to tout-o ye 8r]\ov 
above. 

to t\ tovto pTjp-aJ This 
word " something." pr)p.a seems 
to be thrown in by an after- 
thought, for the sake of ex- 
plicitness ; so giving ri the 



20<I>I2TH2. 



85 



p. 237. tovto prjfia iir ovtl Xeyopav e/caVrore" povov yap being— noi 

» \ .. / cf \ \> / , \ of BO] 

avro Xeyeiv, wairep yvp,vov kcli airi]pr)p(op.evov utto thing. F01 
dSv 



tcov ovtcov airavTwv, aovvarov. 77 yap ; • 

GEAI. 'ASvvarov. 

HE. 3^/)a 7-f;<5e aKOirwv ^v/JL(f)7js &>? dvdyKrj tov 5 
rt XeyovTa ev ye tl XeyeLv ; 

GEAI. OiW *•* 

^E- 'E^o? ya/5 6\; ro ye tl (fyrjaeLS 1 arjpelov eivai, 
to 8e Tive 8volv, to 8e Tives iroXXwv. 

GEAI. Ilcoy yap ov ; 10 

e aE. Toy 5e 5;; //r; ri XeyovTa avayKaiOTarov, 639 
eoiK€, iravTCLTTacri p.r)8ev XeyeLv. 

GEAI. AvayKaioTaTOV p.ev ovv. 

HE. , Ap ovv ov8e tovto crvyytopryreov, to tov tol- 
ovtov Xeyeiv pkv fTif, Xeyeiv pkvTOi pr)8ev, «AA' oi>8e 15 
Xeyeiv (fiaTeov, bs y av eiri^eipfi p.rj ov (pfleyyeaOai ; 



implies 

being. Bat 
•• aot-Bome ' 
is '• none,* 1 
and to 

s|K-ak none 
is not to 



GEAI. Te'Aoy yovv av diropias 6 Adyoy e^ot. 



There fol- 
lows a 



force of an adjective, as in such 
expressions as 17 AiVoAi? avrrj 
ywT]. Heindorf conjectures rh 
pfjfia, which appears in two 
MSS. Stallbaurn renders prjpa 
eV ovri " as a predicate of 
being." 

15. Xeyeiv [pev] frif] Tl, which 

appears in all the MSS., is not 
wanted, and, if genuine, is 
used in common parlance (cf. 
Slipr. 236 e, Xeyeiv pev arret) 
without reference to the pre- 
ceding argument, just as the 
ordinary sense of eivai, 8oKe1v, 
etc., is often found within a 
few lines of the technical use 
of the same words, pev, which 
the Bodleian (not however Vat. 
A.) omits, is probably right, 
though the omission may be 



defended from Theset. 160 b : 
alaBavopevov yap, pr]8ev6s 8e 
alaBavopevov. lb. : yXvKv yap, 
pr]8ev\ 8e y'KvKv. 

pr]8ev] I. e. pr]8e ev. The 

argument from pfj rolvw may 
be thus resumed. — What is 
denoted by pfj ov 1 No exist- 
ing thing: and therefore not 
something : for every " some- 
thing" exists : therefore, 6 pr) 

ov Xeywv ov n Xe'yet. But 

every something is some one 
thing : therefore, 6 ptj re Xe- 

yav oi8ev Xe'yet. But (6 ou8ev 

Xeyav) he who says nothing, 
does not say at all : there- 
fore 6 p.x) ov Xeycov oi8e Xe'yet. 
Compare Parm. 144 c, Thewt. 
189 e. 

17. TeXo? yovv av dnopias 6 



80 



nAATONOS 



graver dif- 
ficulty. If 

Not-Being 
is ii,.t pra- 
cticable, 

neither is 
aught pre- 
dicable of 
the non- 
existent. 
And yet 
Not-Being 
cannot be 
utteivd 
or even 
thought, 
without 
implying 
predicates, 
such as 
unity or 
plurality, 
which im- 
ply num- 
ber, which 
implies 
being. 



SE. Mi]7rco p.ey ehrr}? eri yap, co paKapie, eaTi, p. 238 
K.a\ ravra ye twv airopiwv rj fieylaTT) koll irptoTT]. 
7T€pl yap avrr)v avrov tt\v dp~)Q~\v ovaa TvyyaveL. 

0EAI. rico? (jyfjs ; Xeye K.a\ pLrjbev diroKVYjar)?. 

5 hhE. Tw fX€V OVTL 7TOV TTpOdyivOLT O.V TL T(OV 

ovtwv erepov. 

GEAI. II w? yap ov ; 

SE. Mrj ovtl 8e tl tcou ovTwv dpa irpoay'tyve- 
crOaL (jyrjcrofxev SvvaTov elvaL ; 
o GEAI. Kat Trco^ ; 

£?E. 'Apidpov 8r/ tov ^vpiravTa twv ovtcov TL0epLev. 

GEAI. Ei ne'p ye /ecu aAAo tl OeTeov w? ov. b 

3*E. Mr) tolvvv fir]S eiTLyeLpcopLev apL0p.ov /jLrjTe 
ttXyjOos p-?)Te to ev 7rpo$ to pa] bv irpoo~(pepeLV. 



Xdyos ex 01 ] ° ~koyos, SC. to prj 
ov eiuai, as appears from avrov 
(sc. tov \6yov) below. " The 
saying must surely be thus 
reduced to the last stage of 
difficulty." 

I. Mtjttco pey einr}s\ There 
is a tragic tone in the expres- 
sion. Cf. Legg. 1, 638 a : 2> 

apiare, prj \eye ravra. 

S naKapie] "My simple friend !" 

Cf. Crat. 414c: & paKapie, ovk 
oiad' on K.r.X. 

ecrri] Sc. dnopia, to be sup- 
plied from dnopiav below. 

3. nep\ airrju avrov rrp> dpyi]v\ 

One which affects the very be- 
ginning of the whole matter, 
i. e. enters into the substance of 
the term itself, pr\ ov. Cf. 

SUpr. 233 d : rrjv dpxrjv — tov 

\e\6(vros — dyvoe'is. The diffi- 
culty is this : the word pr/ op 
or jitJ7 ovra cannot be uttered 
or thought without a contra- 
diction : for JU17 ov has num- 



ber, being singular, and prj 
ovra has also number, being 
plural : and number is exist- 
ence : therefore, in uttering 
or thinking the word prj bv 
or p-r] 6vra we attach existence 
to non-existence. In the for- 
mer dnopla it was shewn that 
non-existence could not be an 
attribute. Here it is denied 
that non-existence can be the 
subject of any attribute : and 
yet the word cannot be ut- 
tered without implying attri- 
butes, such as unity or plu- 
rality. Cf. Parm. 164 b, quoted 
above, note on p. 84, 1. 8. 

12. El' irep ye <a\ a'XXo rt] I.e. 

That is most real of which we 
have the most distinct con- 
ception, and our conception 
of number is most distinct. 
This is one of the Pythago- 
rean or later Platonic touches, 
which become more frequent in 
the Politicus. 



20<S>I2TH2. 87 

>. 238. 0EAI. Ovkovv av bpOm ye, &>? eoiKev, e7ri\€L- 
poipLev, coy (f)i]aiv Aoyoy. 

SE. II go? ovv av i) Sid tov CTTopaTO? (jyQey^aiT 
dv TL9 r) kcu rfj Siavola to Traparrav Xafioi ra prj 
bvTa 7] to p.7] bv \c0p\9 dpi6\x.ov ; 5 

0EAI. Aeye, irrj ; 

HE. M?) cWa yue^ iireiftav XeycopLtv, dpa ov 7rXrj- 
c 009 iin)(eLpovfxev dpi6p.ov •KpoarTiQevai ; 

0EAI. Tifirji;; 

HE. Mt; 6f oV, a/?a ou ro et> av ; 10 

0EAI. ^a(j)eaTaTa ye. 

HE. Kai /u?)i> oi>Ve SiKaiov ye out bpObv (pap.ev 
bv eirixeipelv pcrj bvn ivpoaappoTTeiv. 

GEAI. Aeyeis- dXrjOeaTaTa. 

HE. Hvvvoels ouz> co? oure <])0e'y£ao-0ai hvvaTov 15 Not-Being 

> /> ~ v>»- >/ <> /1- v v A >^ is therefore 

opucos ovt enreiv ovTe biavorjuiivai to par) ov avTO unutter- 

/!> > / >.. ^> v j (j, / /• v v v able and 

KaU avTO, aXX eaTiv aoiavoqTOv re /cat apprjTOV Kai inconceiv- 

v 1 /1 \ v» able. 

acptreyKTOv Kai aXoyov ; 

0EAI. YlavTairacri p.ev ovv. 
el £?E. 'A/)' ouf ey^evadparjv apTi Xeycov tyjv peyi- 20 But the 

j , , , „ , greatest 

ar^f airopiav epeiv avTov Trepi ; paradox is 

0EAI. Tt be ; eri pLel^co tlvol Xeyetv aXXrjv hind. 

expfiev ; 

HE. Tt oV, d> OavpLaaie ; ou/c evvoels avTOi? toIs 

10. /xjj ov fie] Sc. eVetSai/ Xe- to speak of using it as a predi- 
ycofiev. cate or subject. 

15. Svwoei?] "Do you gather 17. ddiavorjTov k.t.X.] " TJn- 
or collect" (as the sum of the thinkable, unspeakable, unut- 
preceding remarks). terable, and indescribable." 

16. 6p6ms\ Cf. 6p86v supr. 20. r Ap ovv] " Was I then 
That it can be uttered appears wrong in saying just now that 
from our using the expression. I would tell you the greatest 
Cf. supr. 237 b : to fxr)8aix£>s ov difficulty 1 " I. e. A greater is 
ToXfiatpfv nov (pBe'yy(0~6ai. behind. 

avro naO* a\)To\ T. e. Not 24. Ti 6V, u> 6avpao-ie~\ I. e. 



88 



nAATONOS 



As Not- 
Being 
cannot be 

asserted or 
receive at- 
tributes, so 
neither can 
Not-Being 
lie denied. 
For in say- 
ing " it is 
unspeak- 
able," &c, 
we attri- 
bute Being 
to it, and 
also unity: 
which this 
very word 
"it" im- 
plies. 



XeyOelarLV otl /cat tov eXey^ovTa ety airoplav kolOl- p. 238. 
cm;o"t to fit] bv ovtcos cotrre, ottotolv civto eTriyeipf) 
tls eAe'yxetv, evavTia avrhv avTco irep\ emelvo dvay- 
Ka^eaQai Xeyeiv ; 
5 GEAI. Ylco? <firj? ; erne en cracfieaTepov. 

HE. Ovdev Set to craffieaTepov iv ep.o\ aKoirelv. 
eyco /xev yap vTroOepcevos ovt€ evbs ovTe tgov ttoXXu>v c 
to per] bv Selv fieTe^eiv, apTi tc /cat vvv ovtco? ev avTo 
elprjKa' to /it?) bv yap (f)r]pLi. Ijvviei? tol ; 
10 GEAI. Nat. 

HE. Kat firjv at) /cat a/JUKpov epurpoaOev a(fi6ey- 
ktov T6 avTo /cat ap'pyrrov /cat aXoyov e(fiy]v elvai. 
^vveirei ; 

GEAI. £?lW7T0/xat 7TCOS. 

*5 3?E. Ovkovv to ye eivai Trpoo~aTtTeiv ireipcdpLevos 
evavTia tols TTpoaOev eXeyov ; 



" I am surprised that you do 
not see." 

(24.) avTois rots XexOelaiv] 
Either the dative is governed 
by ev in iwoels, " Do you not 
see that this is implied even in 
what has been said?" cf. supr. 

223 C, ev rot? TrpooSev elprjpevois 
cpdvTaapa 7rapex eTaL /c.r.X. j or 
(Heind. Stallb.) avTols toIs Xe- 
xOelaiv = Kai en to>v \i\6ivrav. 

Cf. Xen. Cyrop. 8, 1, 37 : rois 

npoetprfpevois 8fj\ov. 

I . Kai tov e\eyxovTa\ " Not- 
Being reduces its opponent, 
equally with its supporter, 
to the same straits," i. e. 
can neither be asserted nor 
denied. In the spirit of the 
Parmenides, Plato here points 
out that Not-Being neither is 
nor is not. Compare also 
Theretetus, 183 a, b. This ar- 



gument has an important bear- 
ing on the whole dialogue. 
The impossibility of criticising 
Not-Being when conceived ab- 
solutely leads to the necessity 
of modifying the conception of 
Negation. 

3. inelvo] This pronoun is 
used for the sake of distinct- 
ness to prevent the further 
repetition of avros with refer- 
ence to a different subject. 

8. apri] Supr. els anopiav ko.6- 
icrTrjO'i to fir) ov. 

vvv ovtois] Viz. in the pre- 
vious clause, to fir) ov 8eiv pere- 
X eiv. 

9. gwiets tol ;] " You surely 
understand V Cf. Theeet. 155c: 
enei yap ttov, 2> 0. rt £2Yb, 
whence Stallb. ti. Cf. Men. 
76 d : gvves toi Xe'yco (Pind.) 

15. to ye elvai] This refers, 



20<M2TH2. 



89 



0EAI. Qaivu. 

HE. TV' 6Y ; roDro TrpoaairTCdv ov\ a>s eVi &eAe- 
yopqv ; 

GEAI. No/. 

HE. Kat /x?)^ akoyov re Aeycoi' /cat appi]TOu /cats 
acfyOeyKTOf coy ye 7rpoy ef rot' Aoyoy i7roLov/j.rji>. 

0EAI. rico? 5' ou; 

HE. Oa/xeV 6V ye Se?/^, ewre/o 6p6m ti? Ae'^et, 
/^re cos* ev p.r)re coy 7roAA« Siopl^eiv avro, [irjSe to 
Trapdirav clvto kolXuv' evbs yap e'ldec kol koto, two- io 
tt)v av rrjv irpoaprjaiv irpoaayopevoiTO. 



not, as Stallbaum says, to the 
preceding predicates generally, 
but to the word elvat in the 
previous sentence and eo-Tiv 
supra. 

(l6.) ivavr'ia to'ls Tvp6(r6ev\ 
Supr. 238 a : Mr) ovti &<=' rt to>v 
bvrav dpa npocryLyfeadai (ptjcropev 
dvvarov elvai \ Kal nibs ' } 

2. tovto irpo<Ta.TTTaiv\ " In the 

act of applying Being to Not- 
Being, I addressed the latter 
as one" viz. in using the sin- 
gular verb ea-riv : supr. c. evl 
is governed by 8ie\ey6p.r)v, not, 
as Stallb. says, by Trpoo-dnTav 
understood. " Did I not talk 

with it as One 1 " 8i.a\e'yeodai is 

substituted, with a touch of 
liveliness, for 7rpoo-ayopevetv. 

9. firjc)e to irapd-rvav auTO kci- 
\eiv\ Cf. Theset. 202 a : ovoe 

to uvto ov§e to eKelvo ov8e to 
eKucrTov ovde to pdvov ovde tovto 
Trpoo~oio~Teov, ovb aWa ttoWci tol- 
avTa. 

10. ivos yap e'l8ei] So Bodl. 
and A, the rest vary between ev 

re yap e'iSei (rABC, C01T. n. 
pr. EF), ev ts yap etbei (S2YH), 
and ev re yap fj8rj (i 1 pr. II 1 



edd. vett.), whence Heindorf 
conjectured ev n yap fJSrj, 
which Bekker has adopted. 
This deserves to be considered 
as possibly right : especially 
since the technical appearance 
of ct'Sei, when this had once 
crept in, might give rise to 
further corruption. But »? 
seems to be required to com- 
plete the sentence as it would 
then stand : and the Bodleian 
reading is therefore here re- 
tained. It is unnecessary to 
add ev with the Zurich editors : 
the expression ivos e?8ei Tvpoo-- 

ayopevecrdai = " to be spoken of 

under a form of unity," is 

analogous to ova pari or Xo'yffi 
npoo-ayopeveo-0ai. Cf. Thea't. 
148 d : aanep ravras — evl et'osi 
TTepie"\a(3es, ovt<o Kal tus hri- 
crTTjpas ev\. Xoyw irpoCTenreie. 
lb. I47 d : o~vWa$elv els ev. 
OTW Trpoo-ayopeuaop.ev — Tas 8vvd- 

p.eis. Compare also Phileb. 
64 e : el pr) jxia 8vvdp.e6a ioia 
to dyadov drjpevaai. 

Kal Kara ravTr/v tt)v 7rpoo~- 

prjo-iv] Viz. in being called avTo. 
This note, like some of the 



N 



yo 



TIAATONOS 



But let the 
youthful 
might of 
Thetetetus 



0EAI. YlavTairaaL ye. p. 239, 

HE. Tov ptev tolvvv epe ye en Tis civ Xeyoi ; b 
koll yap ttolXul kou ra vvv rjTTrjpLevov av evpot irept 
tov tov prj ovtos eXeyypv. coare ev eptoiye XeyovTi f 
KaOa-irep eiwov, pi) aKoircopev ttjv opdoXoyiav 7rep\ 
to pi] bv, dXX' ela Si], vvv ev ao\ aKe\j/cop.eda. 

0EAI. Ilwy (pfc ; 

SE. ' Wl r}piv ev kcu yevvalcos, are veo9 cov, rt 
p.dXicna duvaaai avvrelvas 7reipd0rjTi, payre ovcriav 



preceding, would have been 
unnecessary, but for that of 
►Stallbaum, who renders : "Si 
modo nomine aliquo designe- 
tur." 

2. Tov epe] Cf. Theset. 166 a, 
Phileb. 20 b. 

tis &v \eyoi ;] " Who would 
any longer take account of 
me ? " This reading is sup- 
ported by nine MSS. (Bodl. 
e/zereTtris), and is preferable to 
that of the editions : tL tis av 
\eyoi. But if the latter is ac- 
cepted, it means not " what 
is to be said of me ?" but 
"why should any one speak 
of," or " take account of, me ?" 
Cf. SUpr. 224 a, Xeyapev, and 
note. 

3. Kai — ndXat, Kai Tavvv] Cf. 
Theeet. 187 d : OpaTTei p.e iras 
vvv re Kai aWore noXXaKis, ioo~Te 
ev anopiq TroWfj Trpbs epavTov Kai 
irpbs ak\ov yeyovevat k.t.A. 

4. ev epoiye \eyovri — ev (rot] 

" Let us not study from my 
mouth the right mode of ex- 
pression about Not-Being, but 
let us make the experiment 
on you." Cf. Rep. 5, 475 a : 

El (3ov\ei, e(pr), eV epov Xiyeiv. 

5. Kaddtrep eirruv] Viz. SUpr. : 
Ov8ev 8ei to aa<fieo~T(pov e'v epol 



o-Kone'iv. Perhaps in Xe'yovri 

there is a false echo from Xeyot. 

6. eta 8rj] So Si, with the 

old editions. The expression 

is "tragic," like Mtjttco pey e'livqs, 

supr. 238 a ; and does not ap- 
pear too strong when compared 
with what immediately follows. 
The reading of most MSS., ea 
trj, is less spirited, and the con- 
struction ea o-KetyiopeOa is ques- 
tionable. 

8. "idt — avToi] "You have 
all the noble enthusiasm of 
youth. Come then, endeavour 
with all your might to make 
some right utterance about 
Not-Being, without attaching 
to it either substance or unity 
or plurality." " I should be 
possessed with a strange eager- 
ness in making the attempt 
were I to try my hand when 
I see you in such extremity." 

are veos &>v — neipadr/Tij For 

a slightly different touch of 
ironical playfulness, (turning 
on the easiness and not, as 
here, on the difficulty of the 
question asked,) cf. Phileb. 65 b: 

fi\e\j/as els Tpia, vovv Ka\ dXrjdeiav 
Kai T]8ovr]v, noXvv emo-ftcM xpovov, 
anoKpivai aavTa k.t.X. 

9. p'/re ovcriav — avrov] Com- 



20$I2TH2. 



91 



p- 239 



firjTe to ev fjLrjre irXrjQos aptOpLOv TrpoaTiOeh rw /xy 
ovtl, Kara to 6p6ov ^OeyfacrOai tl 7repl avTov. 

0EAI. rioAA?) \xlvr av p.e koli aToiros e^pi irpo- 
Ovfila tyjs €7nxeipr)ae(o^, el ae Totavfr opcov iraayovTa 
ai)TO$ eTnyeipoLrjv. 5 

HE. 'AAA' el 8oKel, ae /lev Kal ep.e yaipeiv ecoptev' 
ems 5' av tlvi 8vvap.eva> 8pav tout evTvyxavcoptev, 
pL^XP L T0VT0V XeycopLev co? iravros pLaWov iravovp- 
ycos els anropov 6 ao<piaTr)9 tottov KaTaSedvKev. 

0EAI. Kat paXa 81] (palveraL. i« 

HE. Toiyapovv el riva (^-qaofiev avTov €)(eiv (f)av- 
TacrTiK^v Teyyrfv, pa&iws ex. TavTrjs rrjs XP eLa ^ r ® v 
Xoycov avTiXai.ifiav6p.evos rjptcov els Tovvavrlov airo- 



pare Parmen. 1 6 1 a : el pevroi 

firjTe to ev firjT enelvo pr) eaTai, 
ak\a irepl SXKov tov 6 Adyoy, 
oi>8e (pde'yyecrdai 8e1 ovBeV el 8e 
to ev eitelvo Kal pr] tiXko vnoKeiTat, 
pr) elvai, kol tov exeivov Ka\ SXKcoP 
ttoWwv avayKT) avTci peTe'ivai. 

2. KaTa to 6p66v\ Cf. Thepet. 

1 7 1 C : a8rjkov el kol ■napaQeo- 

fiev to 6p66v. Several MSS. 

have Kara tov dpdov \6yov. 

3. 7rpo6vpia tt)S eTTixeipr]0-eas] 

Lit. " forwardness in attempt- 
ing :" gen. of respect. Cf. 

Phaedo 99 b : noXXrj av Ka\ pa- 
Kpa padvpia etr) tov Xoyov. 

8. TravTos pdXkov Ka.Ta8e8vK.ev] 
" lias with unparalleled cunning 
hid himself in a very trouble- 
some cover." Cf. Rep. 4, 432 
C : 8vo~(3aTos ye tis 6 tottos (pai- 
verai Kal enlo-KLos' eo-ri yovv ctko- 
reivos Kal 8vo-8upevvr]Tos. aX\a 
yap opas foeov. 

II. Toiyapovv — drroKpivelTai] 

" Therefore when we call his 
art phantastic, by this method 
he will easily grapple with us 



and disarm us, asking, when 
we call him an image-maker, 
what we mean by an image 
generally. We must consider, 
then, Thesetetus, what answer 
can be given to this question 
of our sinewy foe." 

(pavTao-TiKrjv Tex vr l v ] The main 
argument is here resumed from 
p. 236 c. 

12. eK TavTr/g ttjs ^pei'as] "A- 
vailing himself of this line of 
argument." Viz. : that just 
indicated, by which appearance 
is shewn to rest on Not-Being : 
and Not-Being is proved to be 
inconceivable. eK here ex- 
presses the means. 

13. dvTikapQavopevos — Xo'yovs] 

" He will grapple with us and 
retort our argument upon us, 
as it were binding our hands 
behind our backs." The implied 
metaphor in dvTi\ap(3dvecrdai — 
used frequently of an objector's 
arguments — suggests the bolder 
image taken from the common 
expression dnoo-Tpe^ai tlvos tos 



try to in- 
dent '.III.; 



rlll'lil i- r.\ - 



If this be 
impossible, 
the Sophist 

must be 
allowed to 
have hid 
himself in 
a very 
" dark 
tower." 

For if ac- 
cused of 
" phantas- 
tic" or of 
image- 



N 2, 



92 



IIAATQNOS 



making, 
be will aalt 
" What i. 
.■in image?" 
And if wc 
answer " a 
reflection, 
mould, or 
picture," 
lie will 
make as if 
he were 
blind, and 
ask for a 
definition 
that does 
not need 
the help of 
visible 
examples. 



arpexf/ei tov? Xoyovs, orav elScoXonoLoi' avTov kolXco- p. 239. 
fitv, dvtpcoTtov t'l 7iOT€ to irapcarav etocoXov Xeyo/xeu. 
CTKoirelu ow, w Qealryre, XP r h Ti TL $ TC P veavia. irpos 
to Ipontopievov caroKpivfiTai. 
5 GEAI. ArjXov otl (jyrjaopiev to. T€ Iv Toh vdaai 
Kou KotTOTTTpoL? e'ldcoXa, en Kou Ta yeypa\xp.lva /cat TO. 
T€TV7rco/iei'a kou raAAa, baa ttov toluvtu Igtiv 
erepa ; 

SE. <&avep6?, co Gecc/r^re, el ao(pio-Tr)i> ov)( eco- e 

10 pOLKCO?. 

GEAI. Tt 5tJ ; 

iH'E. Aotjet aoi p.veii> 77 iravTcmacTiv ovk e\eiv 
6fx/j.aTa. 

GEAI. riw; 

15 SE. Tr]V CLTTOKpiGlV OTCLV OVTC09 OLVTCp 8iOCpS, lav 

ev KaT07TTpoi9 r) TrXaafiacTL Xeyrj? ti, KciTayeXacreTai 
aov tcou Xoycov, otclv los (3Xe7rouTi Xeyrj? clvtco, 

TTpQCFTTOlOVlieVOS 0VT6 KCCTOTTTpa OVT6 vScLTa yiyVLO- 



xelpas. Cf. Legg. i , 6 2 6 e : naXiv 

tov \6yov dvaa-Tfje\JAcoij,ev. I. e. 

" Let us make the converse 
statement." Theast. 191 c : 

iravTa fierao~Tpe(povTa Xoyov j3a- 
(Tavi{eiv. tovs Xoyovs is brought 
in ivapa irpoo-doKiav at the end 
of the sentence. Compare the 
metaphorical use of o-vp.Trohi£eiv 
and Trap air ohi^eiv. 

I . orav el8a>\oTTOi6v\ For the 
double sentence (el — orav), cf. 
The?et. 199 b : orav — ore. So 
also immediately below, where 
orav is resumed by iav. 

3. ra) veavia] Not necessarily 
= homo protervus vel insolens 
(Ast.). " This, fine fellow." 
" The young man," in a playful 
sense. Cf. Rep. 8, 549 b : Kal 



earn jxev — tolovtos tis o TijioKpa- 
tikos veavia':. Phsedr. 257 d : 
TeXolov y, o) veavia, to doyp,a 
Xeyeis. Eur. Ale. 698 : fj tov 
koXov o~ov rrpovdavev veaviov. 

12. Ao£ei 0-01 p.veiv] " He will 

seem as one who has his eyes 
shut." 8oKe1v is used here to 
express an appearance volun- 
tarily assumed. For p,ieiv, cf. 
Theset. 163 e : fj Ka\ p.vo-as. 

1 6. fj TrXdo-p.ao-t] Referring to 
to. yeypafj.jj.eva Kal to. TeTVTra>jj.eva 
supra. 

For iav resuming orav, which 
was doubted by Heindorf, cf. 
Rep. 4, 445 a, b ; lb. 7, 529 b, 
c — where there is similar va- 
riation in resuming with iav. 



2CXM2TH2. 



93 



I 24O. (JKHV OVT€ TO TTapaiTaV O^TLV, TO 8' 6/C TO)V XoyoOV 

ipoiTrjorei ere fiovov. 
0EAI. Uohu; 

HE. To 81a iravrwv tovtcov, a noXXa elirwv 
rjijloocras ein irpoaeLireiv ovopaTi, (^ey^d/.teuos 1 el- 5 
SooXov eVrt iracriv u>s ev ov. Xeye ovv kou ol/jlvvov, 
IxrjSev vnoxcopcou, tov av8pa. 

GEAI. T/ SrjTct, (6 ijeve, e'lScoAov av (pai/neu eivat 
TrXrjV ye to irpos tolXtjOlvov d(j)cofxoicofx€i>oi> erepou 



What is 
that one 
nature, lie 
will ask, 
in right 
of which 
these 

various ob- 
jects have 
a common 
name ? 
Another 
like thing 
fashioned 



I . to 8" ex rmv \6y<ov\ In 
this, as in other respects, the 
Sophistic method is the carica- 
ture of that of Socrates. Cf. 
Theset. 146, Meno 79. There 
is a strong likeness between the 
Sophist here described and the 
TTiXrao-riKos avrjp pno-Qotyopos iv 
Xo'yoty epofievos, with whom The- 
setetus is threatened by So- 
crates in Theset. 165 c-e : and 
there is certainly an analogy 
between the method now satir- 
ized and the tyiXol Xdyot of 
which Theodoras speaks in the 
same dialogue (Theset. 165 a). 
Contrast, however, with this 
dialectical treatment of the 
difficulties attending the con- 
ception of Not-Being, the Eris- 
tic use of the same question 
by Euthydeinus (Euthycl. 283 
e — 285 a) and the retort of 
Socrates (ib. 286). The expres- 
sion in the text perhaps in- 
dicates a certain reaction from 
the idea of basing knowledge 
on purely abstract definitions. 
Cf. supr. 234 e, and compare 
the Euthydemus, especially 
p. 290. For the use of 4k 
( = What may lie gathered 



from argument), cf. Gorg. 516 

d : ovk lip ayaObs ra ttoXitiko. 
RepiicKrjS fjv i< tovtov tov Aoyou. 
Ou (TV ye <fif]S. Ma At", ovde ye 
o~v, e£ o>f lopdkoyeis. 

t&v Xo'ycoj/] The word is 
here used in the more restricted 
sense of " abstract reasoning." 

4. to $ia TravTOiV tovtcov] 

" That which interpenetrates 
all these." Cf. infr. 253 d : 

fxlav I8eav 8ia ttoXXcov, evbs e/ca- 
o-rou Keipevov ^copi's, vavTr] 8ia- 
Terapevrjv. 

5. <pdey£apevos ev 6V] The 

common term is not dis- 
tinguished from the common 
nature. 

7. tov avhpd] The accusa- 
tive is probably governed, 
vnepftaToos, by dfxivov, accord- 
ing to the inverted style 
of these dialogues. Heindorf, 

who Connects viroxa>pa>v tov 

civSpa, compares Phileb. 43 a : 

vneKCTTrjvai tov \6yov eViCpepo'yue- 
vov tovtov (3ov\opai. But the 
parallel is impaired by the 
participle enKpepopevov. 

9. npos TaXrjdivov «<p.] " Fa- 
shioned to the resemblance of 
what is real." 



94 



IIAATQNOS 



after the 
real ' 

Not like in 
being real i 



A likeness 
is not real, 
and yet it 
has a sort 
of being. 



3E. Erf pov Se Xeyeis tolovtov uXijOlvov, ?; eVi p. 240 

TtVL TO TOLOVTOV CiVey \ b 

0EAI. Ovda/JLco? dXrjOivov ye, dXX ioiKo? pev. 

SE. ' Apa to dXrjdivbv ovtcos ov Xeycov ; 
s GEAI. Ovtcos. 

SE. T/ 8e ; to per) dXrjOivov dp evavTiov dXrj- 
Oovs j 

GEAI. Timv; 

aE. Oitc * ovtcos* ov dpa Xeyeis to eoiKos, ehrep 
toavTO ye /at) dXrjOivov epels. 

GEAI. 'AAA' eaTL ye pr)v irtos. 



1. "Erepov — d\t]6iv6v] "When 
you say ' such another,' do you 
mean another real thing ?" Cf. 
Rep. I, 333 a : Evpfiokaia 8e Xe- 
yeis KOiucovT]fJ.aTa, rj ri a'AXo ; 

3. eoiKos pev] Subaud. akr]8i- 

vbv 8' ov. Cf. Rep. 5, 475 d : 

tovtovs ovv Tvavras cpihocrocpovs 
(pr]0-op.ev • Ov8apcos, einov, aAX' 
opolovs pev (pi\oo~6(pois. 

6. to pr) — ap evavrlov] This 

rests on the conception of Not- 
Being as the opposite of Being, 
which it is one chief object of 
this dialogue to modify. Hence 
probably the emphasis (apa, 
' surely ?') with which the ques- 
tion is put and answei-ed (ri 
firjv • ' of course'). The phrase 
cIkow ovtcos occurs again in 
Legg. 2, 668 d. 

9. ovk *6Wo)s* ov] The cor- 
rection of the Zurich editors, 
which is both clearly intelli- 
gible and accounts for the va- 
riety of readings. Bekker, with 
most MSS., gives ovk ov; Bodl. 

AIT, OVK OVTCOV OVK OV : 3, OlIK 

ovtcos ovk ov : Proclus, OVK OVTOS 

ovk ov. The reading of E, 
which Hermann has adopted, 



is too abrupt an inference from 
the preceding lines, and antici- 
pates the point which is made 
afterwards, ovto is unemphatic, 
and ye is to be taken closely 
with e'Lnep as modifying the 
whole clause. " You mean 
then by an image what is not 
really existent, if, at least, you 
will speak of it as unreal." 
Another way of correcting the 
passage is to read ovtcov ovk ov : 
"An image is of realities, but 
itself unreal." ovto would then 
be emphatic. But the former 
mode is simpler, and therefore 
better. 

1 1. 9E. 'AXX' eori ye prjv ttcos] 
This arrangement of the speak- 
ers is due to C. F. Hermann. 
The other editions and MSS. 

give dXX' e'aTi. ye p-qv to the 

Stranger. To which Thesetetus 
answers ttcos ; but receives no 
direct reply. This awkward- 
ness is avoided by Hermann's 
arrangement ; and Thesetetus 
is led to admit in so many 

words OTi fj eiKcov eariv ovk ov. 

Thus a point is covertly made 
toward.? the main argument. 



20*I2TH2. 



95 



o. SE. Ovkovv dXijOco? ye, 0r/s-. 

GEAI. Ov yap ovv rrXijv y eiKiov ovtoo?. 
SE. Ovk ov dpa ovk ovtcos iariv oVrcoy rjv 
Xeyo/xev eiKova ; 

C GEAI. KlvSvV€V€L TOLaVTfjV TLVa 7T€7rX€)(0ai CTVpL- 

wXoKrjv to pa) ov rw ovtl, koll paXa octottov. 

SE. rtcoy yap ovk oltottov ; opas yovv on Ka\ 
vvv 8ia rrjs €7raXXdiJ€cos ravri]? 6 7ro\vKe(j)a\os 
ao(j)io~Tr]9 rjvayK.aK.ev rjpas to per/ ov ov% (.KOVTas 
bpioXoyeiv eivai 7rco?. 

GEAI. 'Opa> koll paXa. 

HE. T7 <5e 8r) ; ttjv Te^vr/v avTOv Tiva d(popi- 
aavTes r)puv amois avpt(f)covelv oiol re eaop.e6a ; 

GEAI. Ilfj Kal TO TToloV TL (f)o(3ovp€V09 OVTO) 

Xeyeis ; 



1 1 i- i. all} 

an unreal 

it v, though 
nut really 
anything. 



Thus tlie 
Sophist 

has forced 
us to ad- 
mit that 
that which 
is not, is. 



How then 

shall we 
15 consis- 



For nas, cf. infr. : opoXoyelv eivai 
nms, rj ttcos eivai ra fj.rj8ajj.rj ovra, 
eivai irons ra iir) ovra. 

i. Ovkow'] Stallbaum reads 
ovkovv, with nine MSS., for the 
vulg. ovk ov. But the answer 
of Theretetus seems to require 
the negative ovkovv. 

ye, (prjs] Bodl. All, y e<jjriv : 
probably from ye pr)v suprL 

3. ovk ov — owTffls] Ovk ov be- 
cause ovk aXrjdivov, ovk ovtcos 
because ovk dXrjdcos, ovras be- 
cause ehcbv ovtcos. " What we 
call an image is really, witbout 
having reality, an unreal thing." 

5. ToiavT-qv riva — o-vfj,n'hoKr)v~\ 

Cf. Legg. 9, 863 b : to rr)s d8i- 

Kias re Kal /3Xa/3jjs 8id(popov Kal 
to twv eKovaiiov re Kal aKovaicov 
a>S ev tovtois 8ia7re7roiKi/\rai. 

Y. opas yovv on] The Bodl. 
MS. gives these words only in 
the margin, where Gaisford 



read opas ovv, but the y, though 
nearly lost, may be traced, 
where the words were blotted 
while the ink was still wet, on 
the opposite leaf. The Stranger 
recals Thesetetus from merely 
wondering at the result to ob- 
serve the point of the diffi- 
culty. 

8. 8ia Trjs eTraWd^ecos rai/Trjs] 

" Through this reciprocation of 
opposites." 

TToXvKecpaXov] I. e. " whom 
we have already slain in so 
many shapes." There is of 
course an allusion to the hydra. 
Cf. Euthyd. 297 c : rg — v8pa, 

aocpiarpia oiiarj, Kal 8id tj)v cro- 
(piav avie'iarj, el piav Ke(paXr)v tov 
\6yov tis anorepoi, noWas dvrl 
rrjs pids. 

9. r)vayKaKev] So Bodl., with 

the nine MSS. mentioned by 

Bekker. ^ulg. r)vdyKa<rev. 



tently de 
scribe bis 

Shall we 
say that 
In- i-ri:iti-s 
a false im- 
pression ; 
that a 
false im- 
pression 
attributes 
being to 
non-exist- 
ence, and 
vice vei'sa; 



96 IIAATQNOS 

HE. "Orai/ 7T€pi to (])dvTa<r/ia avrov drraTav p. 240. 



and that a 
false propo- 
sition does 
the same ? 



([ito/iev Kca ti-jv re\vr]v elva't rtva unvariqriKr]v avrov, ( 
rore irorepov \j/ev8r] 8o^aQEtv rrjv y^/v^v r/ficov (j)rj- 
crofiev vno rrjs eicelvov reyy-qs, i] tl ttot Ipovfiev ; 
5 0EAI. Tovto' tl yap av akXo e'tTcatfiev ; 

HE. tyevSrj? 8' av 8o£ja earat rdvavrla tow overt 
So^dcpvaa, rj ttws ; 

0EAI. Tdvavrla. 

HE. Ae'yets apa to, fir] ovra 8o^d^etv tyjv \jrev8rj 
io8ofjai> ; 

0EAI. 'AvdyKrj. 

HE. Ylorepov fir) elvat rd fir) ovra 8o^d^ovaav, rj 
was eivai rd firfiajicos ovra ; 

0EAI. "Rival 7TC09 rd fir) ovra 8el ye, elirep \j/ev- 
1 5 erera'i wore, ris tl Ka\ Kara (3pa)(y. 

HE. Tl 8'; ov K.a\ fi7]8afJLCos elvaL rd rcavTois 
ovra 8o^d^eraL ; 

0EAI. No/. 

HE. Kat tovto 8rj \jsev8o9 ; 
™ 0EAI. Kai tovto. 

HE. Kai \6yos, olfiat, \lsev8r)s ovrco Kara ravrd 
[ra,VTa\ vofiio~di]creTat rd re ovra Xeyu>v fir] elvat ko.\ 
rd fir] ovra elvat. 

0EAI. Has yap av aAAeos tolovtos yevotro ; 



6. ravavria to'is ovai] These- 
tetus is again made to assert 
the view of Not-Being as the 
opposite of Being, which is pre- 
sently modified. See below, 258 

e : Mrj Toivvv fj/jias etirrj tis on TOU- 

fdl'TlOl' TOV OVTOS TO /JLT) OV UTTO(f)al- 

vofxevoi To\fxoofj.iv \eyeiv w? 'io-riv. 
14. Set ye] Sc. Aeyeii/ avrrjv 
8o£d(eiv. 



19, 20, 21. Kai — Kai — KaY] = 

" Also." 

21. Kara ravra [tovto] ] Tavra 

is omitted in nine MSS. 

24. SKkcos] Most of the MSS. 
give aWos ; which if received 
would require 6 rd re ovra 
\eyav. The reading of the 
editions is preferable, as in- 
volving a slighter change. 



2o<MrrH2. 



!)7 



.1, aE. ^2)(eSov ovSafioos' dXXa ravra 6 (rocjjaJTi)? 
ov (f)rjcr€L. r) tl? firjyavrj avyxfopuv rivd rcov ev 
(f)povovvTO)v, orav a<pOeyKTa kcu dpprjra kull dXoya 
koll ddtavoyra rrpoS loo fioXoyr)/ Leva ?) ra ivpo tovtcov 
6/j.oXoyijOe'vTa ; fiavOdvoLiev, co QeaiTyre, a *Acyet* ; 5 

0EAI. IT&>s" yap ov pLavOavoLiev, otl rdvavria 
(Prjo-et. Xeyeiv rj/xas T0I9 vvv 8rj, \j/evSr} ToXLirjaavTa? 
elirelv d>s eariv ev bo^ais re koI Kara Xoyov? ; rw 
yap lit) ovti to ov TrpoaaTrreLv r]fxas iroXXaxis dvay- 

h KatJEadai, SLOLioXoyrjo-a/ie'vov? vvv 8rj irov tovto elvai ic 
TravToov dSwaTGOTarov. 

HE. 'OpOce? d7T€Livr)p.6vevaas, dXX' wpa drj (3ov- 
XeveaOai t'l \pi) 8pav rod o-o(J)icttov irepi" ra? ydp 
dvTiXrjxf/eL? Kal d7ropla?, eav avrbv diepevvcofiev ev rfj 



II.: will 

turn upon 
11 1 and a I. 

what has 

1 

to nth i- 

the wi r>l 
•Not- 
Being.' 



2. fj Tis firixavri'] He adopts 
the tone of the Sophist. 

4. 7rpo$ia>p.oXoyripevci\ " When 

it has been previously granted 
(supr. 238 d) that the very 
terms of the admissions which 
have just been made are un- 
utterable," &c. Cf. Tim. 78 a: 

Trpobioixukoyrjvcmevoi. Bodl. All, 
Tvpoa8cop.oXnyr)p.eva : whence C 

F. Hermann gives npos dicapo- 
\oyqp,iva. But this reading is 
without point. 

ra irpb tovtcov 6poXoyr]6e'v- 

ra] Heindorf observes that 
Plato uses this periphrasis to 
avoid the repetition of pfj ov. 
The words refer to the discus- 
sion (of the nature of a likeness) 
which precedes the mention of 
doga and Xoyos, and which bris- 
tles with the forbidden expres- 
sions. P. 2 40 b. Compare Phil eb. 

50 C : ra vvv ttoKKclkis Xeyopeva. 

5. a *Xe'yei*] Bekker, judg- 
ing from Gaisford's silence, re- 



ports \eyei as the Bodleian 
reading. Unfortunately, this 
MS. agrees with all the rest 
except Par. P. in giving Xeyeis. 
But the context leaves no room 
for doubting that Xeyei is right. 
The Stranger has been speak- 
ing in the Sophist's person. 
See (prjarei in the next line, and 
compare the defence of Pro- 
tagoras in Theast. 166. For 
pav6dvopev in the 1st pers. plur., 
cf. supr. 223 e, and note, also 

Phileb. 51 d: dA\' dpa pavBd- 
vo/j.ev, r] ttcos ] IIP. Tveipoipaa. pev, 
6) Scoxpares. 

8. Kara \6yovs] This use of 
Kara confirms the correction Kara 
biKao-rr)pia in Thefefc. 201 d. 

13. tL xpn SpH Cf. Legg. 

6j 777 c • 8iaTTopT](Tfie tl \pi] 
Spav we pi anavTcov to>v toiovtcov. 

14. dvTiXfyeis] "Handles for 
objection." Lit. " Occasions 
for laying hold," as in wrest- 
ling. Cf. supr. 239 d. 



98 



IIAATQNQ2 



And this 
is only the 
beginning 

of diffi- 
culties. 



Must 
we, then, 
give up in 
despair ? 



tcov \j/evSuvpyu>v kou yoi'-jTUiV reyyr\ TtQevTes. bpos cos' 
eviropoi kou iroXXal. 

0EAI. Rat ptdXa. 

HE. yiunpov fxepo? toivvv avrcov SieXi]Xv0ap.ev, 
5 ovcrcov coy ejro? eiireiv tmepavrow. 

0EAI. ABvvarov yap [av], a>? eotKev, [en;] rov 
crofpurTrjv eXeiv, el ravra ovtcds e\ei. 

3?E. TV ovv ; a.7roaTrja6pe0a vvv pLaXOaKiadevre^ ; 

GEAI. Ovkovv eycoye (f)T]pLi Sell/, el /cat /cara 
loapuKpov olol t eirLXafieaOai ny rdvSpo? eapev. 

HE. r/ E^et? olw avyyvco/xyv /cat KaOdirep vvv etVe? 
dyairrjcreLS, edv t?t\ kou Kara. (ipa^y irapaaTraawpeOa 
ovrois uryypov Xoyov ; 



p. 241. 



6. 'aSiWtov yap] The Bod- 
leian has Tap (sic), which sug- 
gests the possibility of a read- 
ing rap' ( = rot cipa). But yap is 
probably right. Cf. Thetet. 
190 e : ovre yap ravrrj ovre Kara. 
Ta itpdrepa (paiverai -^rev^ris iv 
Tjpuv ovcra bo^a. Gorg. 454 d: 
LrjXov yap av ort ov rairov 

ia-Tiv. And iEsch. Ag. 218 : 

Havaavepiov yap dvcrlas irap6eviov 
0' alparos opyfj itepiopyas eitiBv- 

p.fiv dep,is. Eur. Med. 573. 

[av] — [e'irf] ] The former word 
is found in TACH, and 
by a later hand in 2B, the 
latter in every MS. except S. 
Possibly 'Aftvvarov yap (or rap'), 
a>s eoiK, av eirj may be the true 
reading. 

11. Kadditep vvv elite?] viz. in 
saying el Ka\ Kara. crpiKpov k. t, A. 

12. edv 7777 Ka\] Ka\ is pro- 
bably to be taken intensively 
with Kara j3paxv ; cf. supr. 
240 e : elite p ■fyevo-eTal itore rls 
ti Kiii Kara ftpaxv. " If we 



should flinch a little from the 
grasp of such a sturdy ar- 
gument." The metaphor from 
wrestling is continued through- 
out. Cf. Phileb. 41 b: itpoiri- 
(TTuipeda S?) Kadditep d8\r]Ta\ itpos 
tovtov av t6v Xoyov. 

itapao-itaacop.e6a] Lit. " pull 

ourselves aside, draw aside ;" 
i. e. release ourselves from the 
contest. Cf. Soph. El. 732 : 
e£a> itapacrna (sc. tovs iititovs) 
KavaKwxevei. The middle voice 
is here directly reflexive, not 
as in Dem. Olynth. 1, 10 : p.r] 
itapao-itdo-rjTai ti tcov oXcov itpay- 

pdrcov. Compare the use of 
ditoo-rtdo-6ai in Xen. Anab. 1, 5. 

§ 2 : itoXv yap diteaitdro (pevyovaa. 

Those, however, who prefer 
the latter meaning here (read- 
ing edv ttr] ti, with Badh. conj.), 
may compare Theset. 196 d : 

ti el eitixeiprjo'aip.ev avaio~xyvTelv ; 

For the personification, cf. ib. 
148c: el — roil aKp.d£ovros Ka\ 
raxio-rov r)TTr)8r)s, 



20<I>I2TH2. 



99 



). 241. GEAI. II coy yap 06% c'ijco \ 

d 3*E. To8e to'lvvv en p,aXXov irapaiTovpai ae. 
GEAI. To ttolou ; 

aE. Mt; yue chcw irarpaKoiav vnoXafir)? ylyvtaOai 
Tiva. 

GEAI. T/A75 

EE. Toy roO iroLTpos Ylappevldov Xoyov avayKalov 
rjp.lv <xpvvop.evois ear at fiacravL^eiv, kqll (3id{ecr0ai to 
re pr) bv coy eo-n Kara ri Kal to bv av naXiv coy ovk 

eaTL TTYj. 

GEAI. ( T*aiv€Tai to tolovtov 8t.apa)(r)Teov iv to 19 
Xoyois. 

jS*E. II coy yap ov (fiaiveTai Kal, to Xeyop.evov Srj 
tovto, Tv(pXcp ; tovtcov yap p.r)Te tXeyyOevTw prjTe 



Not if we 
may be 

allowed, 
in Belf- 

defence, to 
bring the 

ruvcn-il 
words of 

5 Parme- 
nides to 
the test, 
and to force 
the con- 
clusion, 
that there 
is a sense 
in which 
Not-Being 

10 is, and 
Being is 
not. 



8. $ia£ecrdai — is] " To prove 
by main force that — ." The idea 
is not that of necessaiy demon- 
stration, but that of establishing 
something against appearances. 

Cf. infr. 246 b : vorjrci arret Kal 
d(rd)fj.ara et'Sr; f5ia£6jxevoi rr)v dXrj- 
6ivr)v ovcriav elvai. Theset. 1 53 
c : avaymfa — Ins. Symp. 202 a : 
pr) ro'ivvv avajKa^e, 6 pi) koXov 
ear iv ala-xpov elvai. Cf. Legg. 8, 
841 d, Avhere Ptdfrfiat is used of 
effecting something paradoxical 
and difficult in practice. 

II. Waiver at Xdyois] The 

Bodl. MS., with A and pr. 

II., 0111. 8iafj.axrjreoi>, which 

C. F. Hermann accordingly 
rejects, with the remaining 
words, retaining only cpaiverat. 
" Languidum additamentum 
totum circumscripsi." But it 
may be retoi-ted that, especi- 
ally considering the formal 
style of the dialogue, (paiverai 
alone in this place is abrupt 

O 

LofC. 



and bare. Cf. also Siupaxdpevoi, 
infr. 256 d. 

13. ku\] To be taken with 
rv(f)Xcp : the words to \ey6uevov 
br) rouro being thrust in between. 

Cf. SUpr. 2l8 a, Kal, Kaddnep 
eiire SaiKpdrrjs, Tvdcri k. e. and 

note. See also Rep. 5, 465 d : 

ArjXov, e(prj, Kal rv(j)\a. 

14. eXeyx6evTa>v] The Bodl., 
with AnBi, has pijre \ex6evrap, 
which is Weak ; eXeyxdevrtov is 

right. " Unless this refutation 
and this admission is secured." 
I. e. unless the saying of 
Parmenides is refuted and 
the existence of the non-ex- 
istent admitted. Cf. infr. 

242 b : rov eXeyvov rovrov Kal 

rr)v d7r68eigiv. In Theaet. 188 d 
sqq., it is shewn to be 
impossible to think what is 
not, because all thought must 
have a real object. As Mr. 
Grote remarks, this and other 
negative arguments of the 



100 



nAATGNOS 



I Ulicrwi ie 
an art i f 

and, in- 
deed, all 
imitation, 
is Lncon- 
ceh able. 



p. 241, 
e 



o/JLoXoyijOevrcov cr^oXfj irore ns 616s re ear at irep\ 
Xoycov \J/ev8a>v Xeycov ?) 86{jr)v, elre el8a>Xa)v elre 
cikovcov elre fjaptr] /iareov elre (Ijavraaparcov, avrcov, rj 
kgu ire pi reyvcov rcov oaai 7repi ravra eicri, fxr] Kara- 
tyeXaaros elvat ra. evavrla avayKatpfievos avrco 
Xe'yeiv. 

9EAI. 'AXirfe'arara. 

SE. Aia ravra fxevrot roXprjreov ewirldeadai rap. 242 
irarpiKw Xoyco vvv, r\ to rrapairav iareov, el rovro n? 
lotipyet 8pav okvos. 

0EAI. 'AAA' rjiias rovro ye prj8ev prjSapfj e'lp^r). 

£?E. Tplrov ro'ivvv en ere a/xiKpov ri TTapairr\- 
ao/JLai. 

0EAI. Aeye fiovov. 
15 HE. Wirrov 7rov vvv Srj Xeycov w? rrpos rov irep\ 
ravr e'Xeyxpv ael re a7reipr)Kco? iyco rvy^ava) Kal 8r) 
Kal ra vvv. 



0EAI. EtTrey. 



Thesetetus are not directly re- 
futed in the Sophistes. It is 
rather the negative mode of 
arguing generally which is cri- 
ticized. 

3. avrav, r) Kal ire pi Te)(vcov] 

" themselves, or the arts which 
relate to these." avribv refers 
to all the preceding genitives. 
Cf. Rep. 3, 398 a : ei rjplv depi- 
koito els rr)v ivokiv avros re Kal 
ra Tioirjpara (3ov\6pevos eViSei- 

ijacrdai.. The other rendering, 
according to which avrmv refers 
to (pavTaa-fidrcov alone as the very 
subject-matter of the Sophist's 
art, is not so good. 

8. Ata ravra pevroi] " Ob- 
vious as this truth is, it com- 
pels us — " 



ra> TrarpiKU) \6y(o\ \6yos is 

personified, as in rod pao-i'KiKov 
\6yov supr. 235 C, and narptKos 
has the same force as in narpt- 
kos (f)iXos — " The theory which 
is invested with the sacred- 
ness of our father's autho- 
rity." 

9 . to rrapdivav iareov ] to 

Trapdirav is probably adver- 
bial, and the object of iareov 
must be supplied, e. g. rov 
\6yov — " We must give up en- 
tirely." 

1 1 . rovro -ye] Sc. &crre to 
napdnav iav. Cf. Polit. 268 d : 
rovro ro'ivvv — rjp.lv Troir)reov, el pr) 
peXXopev inl ra reXei Karaio-)(£>vai 
rov \6yov. N. 2. 'AXAa pr)v 
ovdapcos rovro ye bpao-reov. 



2CXM2TH2. 



101 



). 242. aE. <&ofiovpai Si) to, elpr/peva, pi) ttotc Sia Tama 
aot paviKOs eivai Sotjco irapa iroSa peTaftaXcov e'pav- 
1) tov avoa kcu Karen. o~i)v yap Si) X a P lv £^YX eiu T0V 
\oyov 67ri8r)(Top€0a, lavirep eXeyxcopev. 

0EAI. '0? tolvvv epoiye pr/Sapf) So^cov prjSlvS 
7rXr)ppeXeii>, av eirt tov eAeyxov tovtov ko.1 tt)v cmo- 
Sei^LV lr)9, flappwv Wi tovtov ye eW/ca. 

£7E. <J>€/0€ Si) ; Tiva apyj)v ti? av ap^aiTO irapa- 
KLvSvvevTLKOv Xoyov ; Sokcd pev yap ti)vS\ 00 7rai, 
tt)V bSov avayKatoranqv i)plv dvai TpeirecrOai. IC 

0EAI. Uolav Si) ; 

SE. Ta SoKovvTa vvv evapyco? tX eiv €7rta-/ce^a- 
c aflat irpwTOV, pi) irr) Terapaypevoi pev copev 7repl 



With this 
view it 
will be 
necessary 
to exam i ue 
some idi a 
which are 
thought to 
be clear, 
but may 
prove to be 
confused. 



1. $o/3ovpai] "I tremble, 
then, to think of what I have 
said, lest you should pronounce 
me wild." For dei re S17 inter- 
posed, cf. Rep. 2, 367 e: Kcu 

e'yco dKovcras, del pev drj rrjv (ftvcriv 
tov TXavKcovos ko.1 tov \beipdvTov 
rjydprjv, arap ovv kcu Tore ndvv 

ye rjadrjv : and for the meaning, 
compare supr. 242b: ml yap 

nakai Kai rd vvv rjTTTjpevov civ 

evpot. Theset. 187 c. 

2. irapa 7rd8a] "At the first 

step ;" " at each step ;" "at every 
other step." The expression is 
used of persons in motion, as 
nap ttoSI, in Pindar, of persons 
at rest. Thus Soph. Phil. 838 : 

ttoXv napa noda Kpdros dpvvrai. 

In the present passage wapa 
seems to have the additional 
meaning of alternation, as in 

Trap' rjpepav. 

pera^aXav] The tense cor- 
responds to that of dogco, 
otherwise peTa/SdWccv would 
have seemed more natural, 



especially with uvea ku\ Kara. 
Cf. Phsed. 96 b: iroWdicis epav- 
tov civco Kara peTeftaWov. But 

in the present case only one 
change " to and fro " is spoken 
of. 

3. arjv ydp 817 x<*P LV ] Com- 
pare the language of Socrates 
in the fifth book of the Re- 
public, before advancing his 
theory of communism, 450 e. 
See also ib. 473 c. Such ex- 
pressions of reluctance perhaps 
receive some light from the 
passages in the Epistles, if 
genuine, where it is said that 
the philosopher will not choose 
to fix his thought in writing. 

I O. avayKaiordrrjv — Tpe7Tecr6ai\ 

For the inf. after dvay<a'ios, cf. 

Gorg. 449 b. dvayKaioTaTrjv — 
paXicrra dvayicaiov. Cf. Phileb. 
63 b : oTpat pev irpbs ravra rod' 
avrds dvayKaiorarov eivai \eyeiv. 
13. pi] Try Terapaypevoi] "Lest 

we should have fallen into some 
confusion in regard to these 






102 



IIAATQX02 



A. 
Parme- 
nides and 



ravra, paSioi? <5' dAAi']Aoi$ ifxoXoywfxev cos* evKpivcos p. 242, 

0EAI. Aeye aacjiearepov o Aeyets. 

HE. JLvkoAco? fxoi 8oKel Ylapfievidrjs rj/xiv SietXe^- 



things, while glibly interchang- 
ing arguments, as if we were 
quite clear on the subject." 

4. EixoXas] "Complacently;" 
" with easy confidence ;" " with 
good-humoured composure ;" 
" in an easy-tempered way." Cf. 
Theaet. 166 a : 2) padvp-OTare 

EvkoXcos 8tei\e'x6ai] Plato 

means what Aristotle expresses 
where he says that Dialectic 
had no place in early philo- 
sophy, ol yap nporepoi 8iaXeKTi- 
Krjs ov p-ereixov. Al\ Met. A. 

6. 987 b. Compare the lan- 
guage of an article in Fraser's 
Magazine for February 1865 : 
" In older theology there seems 
(of course with brilliant ex- 
ceptions) to have prevailed this 
general defect — that endless 
controversies, and defences, 
and attacks, have gone round 
and round these sacred terms 
without even asking what they 
mean." The question of Not- 
Being is relative to that of 
Being : hence, in order to 
solve the difficulties which 
have arisen, it is necessary to 
examine this, the most familiar 
and fundamental of all ideas. 
This is done historically, 
through a criticism of the re- 
sults of previous and contem- 
porary thought, involving the 
unwelcome task of putting the 
words of Parmenides to the 
torture. The conjecture of 
Badham, oi\ oXas = oXccs ov, 
for cvKokas, is not convincing. 



Cf. Legg. 11, 922 e : MaXdaKol 

f/xoiy*, S> KXcivla, 8okov(Tiv ol 
ndXai vopoderovvres yeyovtvai ku\ 
em crpiKpbv rmv av6pumiva>v @Xe- 
7rovres re xai Stavoovp.evot vop,o- 
Serelv. 

" I think that Parmenides, 
and all who have hitherto 
arisen to determine the ulti- 
mate number and nature of 
existences, have shewn in then- 
conversation with us a sort of 
easy, good-humoured compo- 
sure." 

" In what way ?" 

" They seem to me to treat 
us like children, and to tell us 
stories, each one for himself; 
one relating that there are 
Beings three, which sometimes 
maintain a desultory warfare, 
but sometimes they make peace 
again, and marry, and bring 
forth children and rear them ; 
another speaks of Two, as Moist 
and Dry, or Hot and Cold, 
which he brings together and 
consorts in marriage. But the 
tribe of the Eleatics from our 
quarter, beginning with Xeno- 
phanes, or even earlier, are the 
authors of a different tale, and 
fable that what we call ' all 
things' are One Being. Then 
certain Muses of Ionia, and 
others of later birth in Sicily, 
in taking up the parable have 
seen that it is safer to combine 
both histories and to say that 
Being is Many and also One, 
held together by hate and love. 
For, say the Muses of firmer 



2Q*I2TH2. 



103 



p. 242. 6ai kcu iras oari? Trwirore hri npicrw wp/njae tov to. 
bvra dioplaaaOai iroaa re kcu iroia lemv. 

0EAI. Urj; 

SE. Mv06i> Tuva (lkol<jtos (j)aiveTaL poi Sajyeladcu 
irauriv coy ovcnv yplv, 6 plv coy rpla ra ovtcl, iroXtpels 



tone, Being is ever sundered, 
ever combined : while those, 
who prefer a softer melody, 
relax the ' ever,' and say that 
All is sometimes one and 
friendly by Aphrodite's power, 
but sometimes many and at 
enmity with itself by reason 
of a certain principle of strife." 

1. (ir\ Kpi(TLV TOV 8lOp'lO~a- 

adai] Either " went forth to 
decide the question of deter- 
mining" — where the pleonasm, 
though somewhat harsh, is not 
inconsistent with the style of 
these dialogues. For Kpiaiv in 
this sense, cf. Euthyphr. 7 d : 

eVi Tiva Kpiaiv ov bvvdpevoi d(pi- 
KeaOai — eVl 'iKavrjv Kpiaiv aircov 
iXdeiv. Or, " entered the arena 
to contend for the honour of 
determining." Cf. Legg. 1 2, 

943 d : ftff TT]V tS)v dpiareitov 

Kpiaiv. Soph. Trach. 266: irpbs 
to£ov Kpiaiv. Philoct. 1050: 
ottov biKaicov Kayadcov dvbpcov 

Kplcris. According to the latter 
rendering, Parmenides and the 
rest are supposed to bring 
their theories for judgment be- 
fore the reason of mankind. 

2. iroaa re kcu 7ro7a] Some 
interpreters suppose that Ttoaa 
refers to the earlier and nolo. 
only to the later theories, (infr. 
245 e, sqq.) But although the 
former asked " Is Being One or 
how many," and the latter, " Is 
Being corporeal or ideal," this 
distinction is probably not in- 



tended by these words. And the 
question of 7toi6tt]s is already 
involved in theories of hot and 
cold, moist and dry, harmony 
or discord, and the like. 

4. Mvdov riva — birjydadaij 

Compare Bacon, Nov. Org. I. 
Ax. 44 : " Quot philosophise 
receptre aut inventas sunt, tot 
fabulas productas et actas cen- 
semus, quse muudos efficerent 
fictitios et scenicos." lb. Ax. 
62: "Atque hujusmodi thealri 
fabulae habent etiam illud quod 
in theatro poetarum usu venit ; 
ut narrationes fictse ad scenam 
narrationibus ex historia veris 
concinniores sint et elegan- 
tiores, et quales quis magis 
vellet." Ar. Met. I. 10, 993 a: 

■yj/e'k'Xi^opevr] yap i'oiKev 17 npcoTT] 
(piXoaofpia nepl iravrcov. 

5. naialv a? ovaiv] The 

position of naialv is emphatic. 

Cf. Legg. I, 645 b: irep\ 6avpd- 

tcov wj outwv T)p5>v. Rep. 8, 545 

e : cos irpbs ivaibas fjpds. Illfr. 
254 e : ov TVfpX rpicov cos OVTCOV 

UVTCOV. 

6 pev cos tp'ia — eKbibcoaiv] 
The few remaining fragments 
of the earliest philosophy do 
not enable us to say what 
thinkers are thus briefly indi- 
cated : probably some belong- 
ing to the earlier Ionic school. 
The metaphorical language 
seems to point to a pe- 
riod when philosophy still re- 
tained a considerable tinge of 



others who 
have 

1 oughl i" 
define the 
Dumber 
and nature 
of exist- 
ence, have 
Dot been 
careful t" 



104 



IIAATQNOS 



explain 

their 

meaning, 

but after 
throwing 

out that 
Being is 
three or 
two or one, 
or one and 
many, hot 
and cold, 
at peace 
or war, or 
that it is 
first united 



8e dWijkoi? ivioTt olvtlov olttol 7rrj, Tore 8e koll (j)ika p. 242. 
yiyvoptva ydpovs re kou tokov? koll Tpo(f)d? tcov d 
dKyovoiV 7rape)(€Tai' 8uo 8e (repos elvrcou, vypov koll 
^~lpov ?) Oepphv koll ^/vxpof, cfvvoikl^l re avrd koll 
$6k818co(TI. to 8e Trap rjp.(ov 'EAeari/co^ eOvo?, oltto 

A€VO(J)UVOV? T€ KOLL €TL TTpOtjQt-V dpj-dfltVOV, £09 

evos ovtos tusv irdvTcov KaXovpevoiv ovrco 8i€^ep)(€Tai 
T0I9 fJivOoi?. 'IaSe? 8e kou 2i«:eAa/ rives varepov 



cosmogonical mythology. Thus 
Pherecydes might be said to 
have asserted three principles, 
Zeus, Time, and Earth, as the 
basis of his cosmogony. The 
dualists here mentioned have 
been supposed to include Arche- 
laus, who, according to Diog. 
Laert. II. 1 6, 17, ekeye bvo 
alrlas elvai yevicreas, deppov kcu 

tyvxpov, and who, in describing 
the production of the animals, 
says that they sprang from 
the increasing warmth in the 
lower parts of the Earth, oVou 
to Geppoy kol to vj/uxpof epio-yeTO. 
But, as Steinhart observes, (So- 
phist, note 22,) the dualism of 
heat and cold is a theory of the 
Universe probably older than 
Parmenides, who speaks of this 
as the philosophy of opinion. 
There is of course no allusion 
to Parmenides in these words. 
He is included in the 'EXeaTiKov 
Wvos mentioned immediately 
afterwards. 

2. ydpovs — 7rape^erat] " Are 
found to marry," &c. 

5. to fie 7rap' fjfiap] I. e. e£ 
'Ekeas. Heindorf and Stall- 
baum prefer rjplv, which appears 
in C. H. 2, a. b. c, and in the 
quotations of Eusebius and 
Theodoret. But fjpwv is pre- 



ferable both as the reading of 
the best MSS. and as the less 
obvious reading: "The school 
that came forth from us." 

dno Sevofpdvovs Te Kal en 
npoo-dev ap^dpevov] "From Xe- 
nophanes downwards, and even 
before Xenophanes." This is 
conceived in the same spirit as 
the attempt in the Thetetetus 
to refer the Heraclitean dogma 
to an unknown antiquity. 
Thesst. 179 &'■ 7rep\ toutccv tcov 
'HpaKXeiTeLoyv, fj Loo-rrep av keyeis 
'Opr/peioov, Kal en TrakaioTepcov. 

Steinhart imagines a reference 
to the Pseudo-Orphic Fragment, 

Zeis dpx'Q, Zevs peacra, Ai6s 8" etc 

ndura reXetrru, which is elsewhere 
quoted by Plato, Legg. 4, 7 1 5 e. 

7. evos ovtos t£>v navrcov] 

The participle, although agree- 
ing in sense with TravTuv, follows 
the number of the preceding 
word. Cf. Protag. 329 d : epos 

OVTOS TTJS dpeTTJS. 

8. toIs pvOois] " In their tale 
of the Universe ;" referring to 
p,v66v nva supr. Cf. Theast. 
156 c : ovtos 6 pvdns — viz. the 
theory of Sensation. 

'idbes — Moiio-ai] The word 
vo-Tepov applies to the SiKeXai as 
compared with the 'ld8es povaai. 
Empedocles was later than 



20<M2TH2. 



1 05 



. 242. yioVCTOLL ^VVV€V01]Ka(TLV UTt (TUfJOrXcKftV d(T([)aX€(TTaTOV 

e a.fx(j)0Tepa kcu Xeyetv a>? to bv 7roXXa re Kal kv £(ttiv, 
£X@P a $* KaL 0*A/a avpe)(€Tai' Siafapofievov yap del 
ljvfj.(f)€p€Tai, (jxxcriv at avvrovwrepat tcov M.ovo~cov' at 



Heraclitus, and his speculation 
is viewed by Plato as that of 
Heraclitus in a less exact form. 
See the speech of Eryximachus 
in the Symposium, who treats 
of Love in the spirit of Empe- 
docles (187 a, b) : to ev cprjo-iv 

('HpuKXetros) 8ia(pepopevov avro 
ai'TG) {-Vfxipepeo-dai, uxnrep appovlav 
t6$-ov re Kal Xvpas. eo-ri 8e iroWrj 
dXoyla appovlav (pdvai 8ia(pepe- 
o~6ai t] €K 8ia(pepopevoov ert elvai. 
dXX' 'laws rode tj3ovX(To Xeyeiv, 
on £k 8ia(p(popevcov irporepov tov 
o^eos Kal fiapeos, eneira varepov 
opdXoyrjcrdvTav yeyovev vttu ttjs 
p.ovo~iKrjs rexvr]s. The Words 

770XX7) aXoyia in this extract are 
a good comment on da<paXeo-Ta- 
tov in the text. 

1. gwcvorjcrav] I. e. In re- 
flecting on both statements 
perceived. Cf. Soph. (Ed. Col. 

452 '• tovt eya>8a, Trjo~8e re 
fiavreV aKovav ^uvvo&V re ra£ 
epov 77a\al(paff dpol $oi/3os fjvv- 
aev irore. 

dacpaXeo~TaTov] " The most 
irrefragable position." Cf. supr. 
231 a : tov dacpaXr). Protag. 
351 d, Polit. 262 b. 

3. 8iaqbep6pevov — o-vpcp.) Sc. 
to bv fj to irdv. Cf. Symp. 1. C. 

4. o-WTOva>Tepai p.aXaKa>T(- 

pai] These are musical terms, 
as Boeckh has shewn in his 
contribution to Heindorf's note 
upon this passage : " Desumpta 
vocabula o-wt. et paX. a colore 
s. XP"? m niusicis generibus. 
Etenim ex sex illis coloribus 
unus in enharmonico, duo in 



diiitonico, tres in chromatico 
genere sunt. In chromate est 

Color rjpioXi-os, color Tovtalos et 
juaXoKos, s. rjpioXiov xpeopa, tovl- 
aiov s. crvvrovov xpaipa et XP^P' 1 
paXaKov. In diatono duo colores 
Sunt Siutovov avvTovov et 8taTovov 
p.aXciKov. Ilia crvvTOva Sunt ill— 
tentiora, paXaKo. molliora. Eu- 
clid. Introd. Harmon, p. 10, 11. 
Aristox. Harm. Elem. I. p. 24 
sqq. Gaudent. Harmon. Intr. 
p. 17 : " Notandum autem illud 
exdXaaav, quod est in musicis 
in p.aXai<fi XP°9~" Eucl. p. 1 1 : 
paXaKov 8e tov e'Xo^tfrrov ttvkvov 
aaavTas Kal xP^P a -> eT«8^ to iv 
ClVTCp TTVKVOV xpeojua dvleTcii Te Kal 
eKkverai." Cf. also Rep. 3, 398 
e : Tlves ovv paXaKul — tcov dp- 
povicov. 'lao-Ti, r/ 8' os, Kal 
XuSicrrt, a?Tives ^aXapat koXovv- 

Tai, where the " soft Lydian 
airs" are spoken of with a 
metaphorical meaning. The 
point here is that the union 
of one and many was more 
thorough in Heraclitus than in 
Empedocles. A similar appli- 
cation of these musical ex- 
pressions is made by Aristotle, 
Polit. IV. 3, in drawing a 
parallel between music and 
government, in both of which 
he says the ordinary kinds are 
divergences from the one or 

two best : 7rapeK/3ucm?, tcis pev 
tt/s ev KeKpape'vrjs dppovlas, Tas 
8e Trjs dpLo~TT]s iroXiTelas, oXcyap- 
XtKas pev tcis o~vvTovu>Tepas Kal 
8eo"rroTiKa>Tepas, Tas 8' dvaptvas 
Kal paXaKas 8rjpoTLKas. 



i.y love 
and then 
Bevered by 
hate, li--i\ e 

■ M.ii.- ,:n-|i 

of them 
his own 
way. 



106 riAATftNOS 

8e fjLa\aK(OT€pui to fxlv aei ravO' ovt(ds tx €LV e X"^ a " P* 2 -+ 2 
crav, cV fxepei 8e Tore f±ev eu eivai (j)aai to ttolv koli 
(j)[\ov vtt ' A^podiTt]?, rore 8e rroXXa koll iroXeiiLOv p. 243 
avrb avrcp 8lol yet/coy tl. Tama 8e irdvTa d /iev 
5 a\i]$a)9 Ttr r) purj tovtcov t'lprjKe, ^aXe7roi/, kcll ttXt]/!- 
fxeXh- ovtq) fxeyaXa icXeivols kcll iraXaiols av8puaiv 
iTTLTLfiav' tKtivo 8e aveirk^Oovov dTrotyrjvaaOaL. 

0EAI. To Trolov ; 

SE. Otl Xlav Tu>v ttoXXmv r]p.u)i> v7repi86i>T€s 
loooXiyooprjcraW ovSev yap (f)povTLCTavT€s elr 67raKoXov- 
Oovpiev ai)Tols Xeyovcnv elre caroXenropLeOa, Trepaivovcri 
TO o-(f)€T€poi> aVTWV €KaO~TOl. 1) 

0EAI. Ylas Xiyeis ; 

For when S*E. 'OtCLV T19 CWTWV (pOeyljrjTCU XtyCDV 0)9 6CTTIV 

they say , v * » \ ***** ' » Q 

"Many," 157; yeyovev r\ yiyvtrai iroXXa rj eu rj dvo, koli oepp.ov 



■ One, 

Two," av 

the ad- 



■^rv\pw avyKtpai'i'VfAei'Oi', aXXoOl irrj 8iaKpLO-€is 



5. x a ^ en ° v ] Sc. elirelv, which medy. Cf. Phsedr. 275 d, e. 

is absorbed in what follows. 14. "Orav ris avra>v (pOeygrjrai] 

Ka\ nXrjppeXes — (iriTifxav ] " When one of them utters his 

Compare the structure of saying, 'Many, one, two, are, 

Theset. 146 b : w dmo-relv, o>; have been born, are created,' 

f'yw oljiai, ovre arii edeXrjcreis, ovre or speaks of heat interpenetrat- 

Oefiis rrep\ ra roiavra dv8p\ crotpco ing with cold, while he else- 

inLTaTTovTi veeorepov aTTeidelv. where postulates separations 

6. ovtco [j-eydXa] Cogn. Ace. and combinations, I pray you, 
Sc. to pr] dXtjdun ravra elprfnevcu. Thesetetus, do you at all then 
" To make such grave accu- understand their meaning 1 " 
sations against men of ancient Note the l-edundant participle, 
renown." Heind. well compares as in ecprj Xeyw. 

Legg. 10, 886 c : el pev els aX- as — irroTtdeis] There is 

Xo ri koXcos 37 prj KaXat ex«, ol an emphasis on each of the 

pdhiov emripqv TraXatols oiio-tv. words eariv, yeyove, ylyverai, 

7. eKelvo] " That former 7roXXa, ev, 8vo, 6eppov, \}/v)(pcp, 
thing," viz. what was implied SiaKplaeis, crvyKpio-eis. 

in (vkoXcos k.t.X. 16. aXXodl tttj] Either, "in 

9. V7repc86vres] "Looking over some other part of his treatise," 

our heads." This was the error or " as taking place in some 

which Dialectic, or the Socratic other region." For 6epp. \j/. 

dialogue, was calculated to re- a-vyx., cf. Archelaus ap. Hippol. 



20<M2TH2. 



107 



243. kou avyKplcreLs viroTiOeis, tovtcov, co GeouVf/re, eKu- 
crrore av ri irpbs Oecov £vi>i€i? 6 tl Xeyovatv ; eytw 
pev yap ore pev rjv vecorepos, tovto fre^ to vvv diro- 
povptevov birore tis eliroL, to /jltj ov, a.Kpi(3co? wpirjv 
<~vvi£vai" vvv Se bpas %v la-p.lv avTov irepi ttjs 
air op las. 
c GEAI. 'Opu. 

HE. Ta^a tolvvv taoof ovx tjttov KaTa, to ov 
Tambv tovto irdOos ei\r}(j)6T€9 iv Tjj \j/v)(f) 7repl pcev 
tovto eviropeiv (pap.ev K.a\ pavOdvetv oTTOTav ti? ovto 
(j)0e'ytjr)Tai, irepl de Oarepov ov, irpbs ap.(poT€pa 

OpLOLOOS €)(OVT€?. 

GEAI. "lam. 

HE. Kou 7repl tcov dXXcov 8rj tcov 7rpoeipr)p.evGov 
y]plv TavTOv tovto eiprjaOco. 

GEAI. Uavvye. 

HE. Tcov piev tolvvv iroXXwv irept Ka\ p.€Ta tovto 
orKe\j/6pL€0\ av Soijr), Trepl 8e tov peylaTov re Kal 
d dpxoyov irpaoTOV vvv o-k€7tt60v. 



mixturi "i 
heat and 
cold," 
•■ are," 
" have been 
produced," 
"come into 
being," or 

5 when they 
speak of 
the com- 
position 
and divi- 
sion of 
elements, 
do we 
understand 
them? 

10 Not-Being 
may have 
once ap- 
peared an 
intelligible 
phrase, but 
see where 
it has 
brought 
us now. 
5 Let us 
therefore 
turn and 
examine 
the most 
cardinal of 
all ideas, 
that of 
Being, 



Ref. Haer. I. 9 : deppaivopev)]s 
ttjs yrjs irpioTiov iv tco Karon pepei, 
ottov to deppbv Kal to y^v^pov 
ip-lcryeTo. 

I. tovtcov] Neut. 

3. tovto j~Tef] re is with- 
out correlative : whence Herm. 
conj. ye, which has no meaning, 
Par. H. o-ov roVe, which cannot 
be right, but suggests the conj. 
tots ye. But, as the Bodleian MS. 
omits to, it seems most likely 
that to Avas first corrupted into 
t«, and then again inserted. 
Hence re is to be omitted. 
Otherwise we must suppose 
that the apodosis is absorbed 
in the words ro^a tolvvv tVws 



ovx t]ttov Kara to ov k.t.A. For 
which, cf. Ph.sedr.265 d: els p.iav 
re I8eav avvopcovTa ayeiv k.t.\. 

5. iva ttjs aTropias] " What a 

point Ave have reached in the 
perplexity about Not-Being." 
The article is used because the 
difficulty attaching to the no- 
tion of p.fj ov is by this time 
familiar. 

14. to>v aXXcov tcov Trpoeiprjpe'- 
vcov\ yeyovos, yeveais, 7roXXa, iv, 
8vo, Oeppov, yj/v^pov, 8iaKpio-eis, 
avyKpiaeis. 

1 8. Toil peylcTTOv Kal dp%riyov~\ 

" The mightiest and chiefest." 
Being is spoken of Avith pro- 
found reverence, as in Rep. 6, 



108 



nAATONOS 



in the 
light ..I 
existing 
theories. 



We first 
interrogate 
the philo- 
sophers 
who hold 
that all is 
resolvable 
into two 
ultimate 
existences. 
When they 
say that 
these two 
exist, what 
do they 
mean ? 
Do they 
postulate 
existence 
as a third 
element, 
or identify 
it with one 



509 b, C '. ovk. ov(rias ovtos rod 
dyadov, dXk' ert iireneiva rrjs ov~ 
crias 7rpecr/3eta Kai dvvdpei imepe- 

XOVTOS. 

I. Tlvos ty Ae'yeis] " Sic seni- 

jjer in responsione negligitur 
prsegressa prepositio." Heind. 
— Cf. Rep. 7? 53 1 d : rov wpooi- 

jxlov — rj tlvos Xe'yeis ', 
, 4. Kara 7roSa (sc. erropevos) J 

" At the heels." " Following 
my footsteps closely." (Cf. 
Soph. (Ed. Col. 197 : iv — /3uo-« 
fiaaiv dpfxoo-ai.) The plural Kara 
ttoSos is the more usual form ; 
hut the sing, occurs again 
Legg. 11, 918 a: Ki@&r)\ois 8' 

eTTiTrjdevpao-iv eWerat Kara. Tr68a 
Ka~r)\e[as eniTrjSevpaTa. 

6. avTu>v\ Probably em- 
phatic, " as if the men them- 
selves were personally present 
here." 



II. pr/ 8vo en Ka6 y u/xas] "And 

no longer two according to 
your theory." I. e. either, 
" must we give up your theory 
and make three principles in- 
stead of two 1" or, " must we 
understand you to assert three 
principles instead of two V 
The former way of taking the 
words is more pointed, but 
the latter is in better keeping 
with the context, 

14. dpeporepms] "Both ways." 
I. e. either, " as Being is identi- 
fied with one only, and as the 
one term Being is predicated of 
both alike" (the latter part of 
this argument loses force when 
the nature of predication is 
clearly understood), or, perhaps 
better, dpeporepas = "Whichever 
of the two is identified with 
Being." 



BE A I. TtVo? 81) Xeyets ; ?/ Sr/Xov on to bv (ftys p. 243 
irpcoTov Setv StepevvijaacrOai, t'l iro6' 61 AeyovTes avro 
Si]Xovv i)yovvTaL ; 

SE. Kara iroSa ye, co QealrrjTe, v7reXa(3e?. Xeyco 

5 yap Si) ramrj 8eiv woielaOat ti]v pe6o8ov r)pas, oiov 
avToov irapovTwv avanvvQavopevovs u>8e' ( l>e'pe, biro- 
aoL 6epp.ov kol \J/vxpov rj Tive 8vo tolovtco ra iravT 
elvai (j)are, t'l irore apa tovt eif afi(f)oiv (jjOeyyeade, 
XeyovTes ap.(f)co Ka\ eKarepov elvai\ tl to eivai e 

lotovto i)Tro\d$(j£>p.ev vpLcov ; irbrepov rplrov irapa ra 
Svo eKelva, /cat rpia to ttolv, aXXa. p,r) Suo en Kad* 
vp.a.5 TL0copev ; ov yap ttov toIv ye Svolv KaAovvres 
OaTepov ov ap.<pOTepa bpolco? elvat XeyeTe' oyehbv 
yap av ap(j)OTe'pco? eV, aAA' ov 8vo elniv. 

15 6EAI. 'KXrjer) Xeyeis. 



20<M2TH2. 



KM) 



.244 



243. ££E. 'AAA* apa to. ap(j)co (SovXeaOe KaXelv ov ; 

GEAI. "Io-oy. 

SE. AAA', w (f)lAoi, (f)r)aop.ev, kolv ovtco to. 8vo 
XeyoiTO av aacjiearara ev. 

GEAI. OpOoTaTa e'iprjKa?. 

AE. 'E/Tei^?) tolvvv rjfieis 7]TTopi]Kapev, vpei? aura 
rjp.lv €p,(f)avi(€Te iKavoos, t'l 7roT6 (3ovXea6e arjpLalveLV 
ottotolv bv (pOeyyrjaOe. 8r/Aov yap 009 vpeh ptv tolvtcl 
irakat ytyvcoaKere, -qpels 8e 7rpb rod plv cpop.e6a, vvv 
8 i]iropr]Kapev. &5ao7cere ovv irpwTov tovt ocvto 
rjpas, Iva pr/ Sotjafyopev pavOdveiv pev tol Xeyopeva 
Trap vpcov, to 8t tovtov yiyvr/Tou irav TovvavTLOv. 
b IfavTa 8rj Xeyovres re koll atJLodvTes it apa re tovtcov 
Kai irapa tcov aXXcov, oaoi 7rXeiov evbs Xeyovai. to 
ttolv elvai, p.cov, co ttol, tl 7rXrjppeXr}aop€v ; 

GEAI. "H/acrra ye. 

SE. T7 8e; irapa tcov ev to irav XeyovToov dp ov 

7T€VOrT€Ol> CIS 8vVapiV TL 7TOT6 XtyOVCTL TO OV \ 

GEAI. ITcoy yap ov; 

jS?E. T68e tolvvv aTTOKpLveaOwaav. "E^ irov 



which is 

tan t ;l - 

mount to 

r 1 living 
all into 
one ? or 
do they 
give to 
both the 
one name 
of [icing, 
so making 
both one '. 



The same 
argument.-* 
'5 will apply 
to all who 
hold a plu- 
rality of 
natures. 



Then let 
those who 
20 assert One 



i . ' AAA' apa] Stallb. and Herm. 
give apa. Cf. Kep. 2, 374 b. 
" But perhaps you mean to 
give the name to both toge- 
ther ]" The Bodl. MS. gives 
apa invariably, and is there- 
fore of no use in deciding be- 
tween apa and apa. 

6. air a] This is the same 
vague use of the neuter of avros 
which is common inThucydides. 
Cf. ravru infr. 1. 8. 

9. aop.e6ci\ Sc. yiyvdoaicf a', 
Cf. SUpr. 233 b: et /xijre dvre- 
Xeyov opdws P-iyre ineivois e<pai- 

VOVTO. 



11. 8o£d£a>p.eu p.av8dvet,v p.ev\ 

p.ev belongs to the two preced- 
ing words taken as one. Cf. 

Theset. 151b: pt] oo£cocr( ncos. 

12. to 8e] "Whereas really. - ' 
Cf. Thetet. 157 b: to 8' ov 8e?, 
and note. 

1 8. els 8vvap.iv] I.e. " So far 
as is possible when they are not 
present." Cf. Thetet. 184 a. 

20. TdSe aTTOKpLveo-doia-ai/ ] 

" Let them give an answer 
to the following question." Cf. 
Legg. 10, 901 c: Nw 8r) 8v' 

owes rpio-iv rjplv ovaiv dnoKpi- 
vdo~8aio~av. 



110 



I7AATQN02 



Being t.ll 

UB what 

the; mean 



\r ■ Being 
and Unity 
two names 
for the 
same 
thing ? 

It will 

puzzle 
them to 
answer 
this, or in- 
deed any 
question. 

For how 
can there 
be two 
names, or 
a name at 
all, when 
there is 
nothing 
beside the 
One Being? 
Unless the 



(j)aT€ pouov tlvai ; ^apev yap, (j)i]0~ovcrii>. r) p. 244. 
yap ; 

0EAI. Nal. 

HE. 1/ 6Y ; bv KaXeiTe tl ; 
5 0EAI. No/. 

HE. Iloreyoo^ O7T6/0 eV, eVf rco ai/rco Trpoa\ptopevoi c 
5fOii» bvopacriv, ?) 7TGk ; 

0EAI. TV's" 01)1/ avrol? r] fxera tovt , cb £eVe, 
airoKpicris ; 
10 HE. A^Ao^, to QeaiTrjTe, otl rco ramrju ttjv 
viToOecriv inroOtfievw irpbs to vvv lpcoTr]6iv, koli Trpbs 
dXXo 8e otlovv, ov irdvTcov pacrrov diroKpivao-Qai. 

0EAI. Ylm; 

HE. To re 8vo bvop.ara bpoXoyeiv eivai, pur)8ev 
\5 0epevov irXrjv ev, KarayeXacrTov ttov. 

GEAI. Ylm 8 ov; 

HE. Kcu to Trapdirav ye aTroSeyeaOai tov Xeyov- 
tos cos ecrTiv ovopLa tl, Xoyov ovk av e%ov. tl 



6. onep ev\ Cf. the Aristo- 
telian use of Bnep, e. g. Phys. 
Ause. I. 3. 

11. Ka\ Tvpb<; ciXXo Se otlovv] 

"And not only so, but in an- 
swer to any other question." 

12. OV TTOLVTUiV pq0~T0v\ " Not 

the easiest thing in the world." 
Cf. supr. 2 1 8 c. I venture to 
think that this is the true 
reading also in Kep. 6, 497 d, 

instead of ov irdvTcos pqo-Tov. 

ndvTcos was the reading of Ste- 
phanas (apparently with C E) 
in this place, and of 2Y in 
218 c. Cf. Legg. 6, 779 e : 

ov navTcov evKo\a>Ta.Tov. 

18. Xoyov ovk av ex ov \ C. F. 

Hermann has reverted to the 
reading of the old edd. Xoy. 



ovk av ex.01. But it is unne- 
cessary to alter exov, which is 
the reading of the best MSS. 
The participle corresponds to 

the adjective KaTayeXaaTOV in 

the previous clause : and av is 
more forcible with the parti- 
ciple (" is a thing which can- 
not square with reason") than 
it would have been here with 
the optative (" would be un- 
reasonable"): eo-ri, not ei'77, must 
be supplied. Cf. Theaet. 164 a : 

emaTTjptev tovtov yeyovev oimep 
opav. Infr. 257 d : tovt ovv 
dvuivvpov epovpev rj tw e'xov 
e7Tcovvp.iav ; 6. exov. " This is 
an admission which they can 
never make consistently. For 
if the name is other than the 



20M2TH2. 



Ill 



6EAI. Uy; 

SE. TiOel? re Tovvopa rov TrpdypaTOS eTepov Svo 
XeyeL irov Tive. 

0EAI. Nai 

iHE. Kat /x?7J> ai> tolvtov ye aura) 7^17 rovvopa, 
i] /ArjSevo? ovo/jlol avayKaaO-qaeTai XeyuV el Be tlvos 
avro (f)y]crei, orvfifirjcreTai to ovofia opo/jlclto? ovopa 
fiovov, aXXov Be ovBevos bv ; 

6EAI. OurfflS". 

SE. Kai to ev ye, evos [ev] 6i> povov, koll tovto 
ovo/jloltos ~favTO ev bv j". 



name be 
identified 
with the 
thing, in 
w hich case 
it i.s either 
the- name 
of nothing 
or the 
name of 
itself, that 
is, of a 
name. 
And Being 
is but the 
name of 
One, which 
is a name. 
Further, 
their One 
Being is 



thing, there are two : if the 
same, the name either denotes 
nothing, or itself only. Hence 
if they admit that a name is 
anything, their One Being be- 
comes the name of a name." 

6. r) /JLT]8ev6s el Se twos] 

Change of construction for rj ei 

TWOS. 

IO. Kat to ev ye] "And (it will 

result) that the One also is 
only one of one, and this ' One 
that is' again (tovto — av to ev 
ov) (proves to be the name) of 
a name." I.e. "Oneness is only 
predicable of The One, and 
this after all is but a name." 
So, a little differently from 
Heindorf, I would translate the 
words as they stand (reading 
av to). The omission of ep after 
evos, as in nine MSS., hardly af- 
fects the sense. Heindorf ren- 
ders : " Atque unum, quatenus 
est unius tantum unum, hoc 
quoque nominis rursus unum 
(das Eins eines Namens) esse 
efficietur. Pendet enim etiam 
postremum hoc bv a prcegresso 
(rv/iiS^o-erat." The place seems 
to be corrupt : but none of 



the emendations hitherto made 
are satisfactory. The Bod]., 

with A i, has tov ovo/jlotos. 

The MSS. give ovto ev ov. 

Stallb. : Kcu ov ttov 6v6u.citos 
avTO ev ov. 

(This is not dialectic but 
common sense.) 

Herm. : evos ev bvofia ov, Kai 
tovto ouofxaTos av to ev bv. 

Badham : Kai to ev ye, evos 
ev bv uovov <a\ tovto, 6v6u.aT0S 5' 

ov to ev ov. But how does 
this help to prove that all 
questions are alike unanswer- 
able on the Eleatic principle 1 
Steinhart : ko\ to ov ye, evos 

bv bvofxa, Ka\ tovtov ovtos ovofxa- 
tos ovto ov bvofxa. 

Wagner (in Rhein. Mus. XL 

1857) : Kai T0 ° v 7 e * vos bvo/ia bv, 
Ka\ tovto bvofiaros av to ovo/jlo bv. 

The two last mentioned at- 
tempt to resume and complete 
the argument from rts ovv — 
airoKpio-is. And it is clear that 
the sentence contains an appli- 
cation of the preceding remark 
to the One Being. 

Perhaps the words avro 
ev bv may be the remains of 



11 2 



IjAATONOS 



conceived 
aa Totality. 

I '.ut if ii ' 
be a \\ hole, 

" Like 

every way 
unto a 
rounded 
sphere," 

it then lias 
parts, viz. 

centre and 

circumfer- 
ence. And 
that which 
has parts 
may be 
one as par- 
taking of 
unity, but 
cannot be 
the same 
with unity, 
for unity is 
without 
parts. 



0EAI. 'Amy/07. 



p. 2. 



aE. TV Se ; to oXov erepov tov ovtos €VOS y 
tolvtov (j)yaovo-t tovtoj ; 

GEAI. IT&j? yap ov (f)yaovo~t re koll (J)aatv ; e 

5 HE. Ei to'lvvv oXov iariv, wcnrep koll Ylappevlby? 

iruvToBev €vkvk\ov crcbaip}]? evaXtyKiov oyictp, 
fieacroOev icro7raXeg iruvry' to ■yctjO ou tc ti /neii^ov 
ov re ri (3atOTepov ireKevai yjpeov ecrri rrj ij t>7, 

tolovt6v ye ov to ov p.€0~ov re koll eayara e'^ei, Tama 
8e t\ov Tracra dvayKy ptepy tyeiv. y 7rco? ; 
GEAI. Ovrm. 

HE. 'AAAa fMyv to ye fxepepiapLevov iraQos pev p. 
roD ivos e'xe^ eVi rot? p.epeai iraaiv ovSev airoKto- 
S Auet, /cat TavTr) by ttolv re oi> /cat oAoz/ ei' eiVat. 
GEAI. TIS ov: 



245- 



some marginal note (e. g. drrou 
tov ivos, explaining dvouaTos), 
and Plato may have written 
Kal t6 eV ye e>6s e> 6VofJia 5V, 
Kal touto ocojxaTOS. " And (it 
will result) that the One also 
is the one name of One, and 
that of a name." I. e. Not 
only is Being not another name 
for Unity, or Unity for Being, 
but Unity is the name only of 
a name." The drift of the pre- 
ceding argument is the fol- 
lowing : 

" Are IV and ov two names 
for the same thing ] 

" Are they even two names 1 
Or can there be both name 
and thing 1 ? 

" Even the one name ev 
can only be the name of a 
name." 

5. okov eorii/] Sc. TO ov. 



So far unity has been attained 
by merging all things in the 
mere name h> ov. But is not 
to okov still distinct from this 1 

IO. uiaov re Kal eo-x aTa *X eL ] 
Cf. Parni. 145 a : okov ov Kal 
apx^v av e\oi Kal fiearov Kal Te- 
kcvTrjv ; rj oiov Te ti okov eivai 
uvev rpiav tuvtcov ' } K.T.k. 

1 3. 7rd6os u.ev tov evbs €)(eiv] 
" That which has parts may 
indeed partake of unity in all 
the parts (i. e. may have unity 
impressed on them), and being 
thus an All and a Whole may 
be in this way one." For the 
distinction of rrav and okov, see 
Theset. 204, which passage Plato 
may have thought of here. The 
words 7rd0os and irdo-xetv are 
used in the same sense also in 
Parmen. 147, alib. See Grote's 
Plato, vol. ii. pp. 303-306. 



20M2TH2. I 1 S 

245. HE. To 8e ireirovOos ravra up ovk uSvvcitov avro 
ye to ev olvto elvai\ 

0EAI. Um; 

HE. 'Apepe? 8rj wov 8et wavTeAco? to ye dArjOcos 
ev kclto, tov opObv Xoyov elprjcrdai. 5 

0EAI. Aei yap ovv. 
b HE. To Se ye tolovtov £k ttoXXcov pepcov ov ov 
o-vjj.(f)Govr}crei tco Xoycp. 

9EAI. MavOdvco. 

S*E. TioTepov 8r) irdOos eypv to *6v* rou eVo? 10 is Being 

(■/ r/ 3/ \ <•/,. ,\ / \ -. / then one 

ovtco? ev re eo~Tcti /cat oaoj>, 77 TTavTcmacn pr) Xeyccpev only by 

cf -y \ v participa- 

oAoz> eivai TO ov ; tion, or 

0EAI. XaAe7n)i> TTpo(3el3XrjKa9 dlpeaiv. say that 



HE. ' AXrjOe'aTaTa pevTOi Aeyeis. ireirovOos re yap ^Xt 



whole ? 



for- 



v A t \ 9 / > j \ ,\ ~ « \ j / \ whole 

ro ov e^ eu>at 7ra>?, oi> tolvtqv ov tco evi (patveTcti, koli 15 i n the 

\/ ?< x ^ ' t \ 3/ mer case 

TrAeova or) tcl ircivTa evos ecrrat. Being ig 



GEAI. Na/. 



1. To Se nenovBos ravra] agree in giving oXoi>, but 6i>, 
Compare the language of Parm. the correction of Schleier- 
147 c-148 c: >? erepov ehai rnacher, is absolutely required. 
7rej7op6e ra>v aXkav, Ka\ raKKa The same corruption occurs in 
eKeivov ao-avrcos, ravry ravrbv av Prot. 36 1 b. The Bodleian, 
•neirovBora elev to re ev rols ctXkois by giving rco oAo> Xdyw just 
Ka\ raXKa rw ivi k.t.X. above, betrays the tendency 

2. to $v avro ehai] The which has produced the error, 
pronoun avro is added where Cf. Thea?t. 149 c, droKois (Bodl. 
the subject has been thrown droirois with dronararo? above) : 
back to the beginning of the lb. 158 c, 6V<a XPV (Bodleian 
sentence, as in Rep. 5,477 d: ora XP° V( ? XP*1> with xP° V0V 
eTno-rrjfxTjv -norepov dvvapiv riva below). 

(pfjs eivai avTrjv ; 1 3. XaXenfju — atpeo~iv\ Cf. 

IO. Uorepov £77] I. e. " Is Theset. 196 c: "Anopov aipeaiv 

Being one only by participa- npoTidrjs, w 2co/c/jare<r. Legg. 9, 

tion in unity, and a whole in 858 a: TeXoiav, S> £eve, irporide- 

this way, or is Being not to peda rrjv alpecriv. 
be thought of as a whole at 14. 'AXijd^o-rara pevroi \eyeis] 

all?" "You are right. It is truly 



distinct 
from Unity 



tov evoi 



bs] The MSS. difficult, 



114 



IIAATQNOS 



and there 
arises 
a plurality 
of ele- 
ments. 
Ami in the 
latter case, 
supposing 
a whole 
to exist, 
there exists 
something 
outside of 
Being : and 
moreover 
there is 
again 
plurality. 



HE. Kai p.i)v edv ye rb ov f) firj oXov 8ia to ire- p. 245 

TTOvOlvai TO VTT €K€Ll>OV 7TO.0O9, fj 8e OLVTO TO 0X0V, C 

ivSee? to ov eavTOv ijvp.(3alv€i. 
0EAI. Tldvv ye. 
5 SE. Kcu koltol tovtov 8rj tov Xoyov eavTov crTepb- 
\xevov ovk ov eaTou to ov. 
0EAI. Ovrm. 

SE. Kcu evos ye av irXem tol iravTa yiyveTai, 
tov Te ovtos /ecu tov oXov x^P^ i8iav eKdTepov (f)V- 
locrtv eiXrjtyoTO?. 
6EAI. Nat. 

HE. M?) ovtos 8e ye to irapdirav tov oXov, Tamd 
Te TavTa virdpyei ra ovtl kcu 7rpbs tg> pj] eivcu p.rj8' d 
av yeveadai ttotI ov. 
'5 0EAI. T/&J; 

HE. To yevoptevov ae\ yeyovev oXov, ScrTe ovtc 



i. fj fxrj S\ov] The order of 
words is inverted, as so often 
happens in this dialogue, pro- 
bably in order to point the 
antithesis by giving emphasis 
to \il). " If Being is not a whole 
through parcicipating in unity, 
and the nature of the whole 
exists, Being then falls short 
of Being" (does not contain all 
that exists). 

Is Being abstract or con- 
crete 1 If abstract, Being is 
not a whole, or finite. If con- 
crete, Being is separate from 
abstract Unity. In the latter 
case there are two principles. 
In the former, (a) if a whole 
exists, not only are there two 
principles, but something ex- 
ists apart from being : and 
(/3) if a whole does not exist, 
Being could never have come 



to be, for what has come to 
be is completed as a whole. 
This last argument is much in 
the spirit of the Parmenides. 
Compare also Phileb. 15 b: 

nebs (del vndXaufidvetv) p.iav eKa- 
arrjv ovcrav del 7-171/ avrrjv /cat pr]re 
yeveaiv pyre oXedpov Trpocrde)(o- 
pevrjv, o/xcoy elvai fteftaiorara piav 

ravrqu. The Eleatic would of 
course reply that he denies 
yeveo-is altogether. And so 
Plato would have reasoned at 
an earlier time. 

12. ravrd re ravra VTrdp^et rco 
6W1] ovk ov eari kcu 7r\eia> 

evos. Compare the language 
of the Parmenides. Bodl. 

ravra re ravra. 

I 6. yeyovev o\ov\ Cf. Parm. 
153 C .' Kai prjv popid ye (prjcro- 
aev ravr elvai rrdvra rdWa rov 
oXov re Ka\ eVoV, avro be eKelvo 



20<i>irrH2. 



245. overlap ovre yevecnv coy ovaav Set irpoaayopeveiv '\ro 
ev 77-j- to oXov ev rols overt, /jltj riOevra. 

0EAI. YlavTairaaLv eoiKe ravO' ovto)? e^etv. 

£JE. Kal /jltjv ovS" birocrovovv ti Sec to /jitj oXov 
elvai- ttoctov tl yap ov, ottoctov av fj, toctovtov oXov 
avayKalov elvai. 

0EAI. KofitBrj ye. 

SE. Kal TOivvv aXXa ptvpla airepavrovs a7roplas 
e eKaarov eiXrjtybs (paveirat rco to bv etre hvo rive elre 
ev fiovov elvai Xeyovn. 

0EAI. ArjXoi o~xe$oi> Kal to. vvv virofyaivovTa' 
o-vvdirTeraL yap erepov etj dXXov, /j.e[^co Kal \aXe- 
ircoTepav (f)epov irepl tcov efiirpocrOev ael prjdevrcov 
TrXavrjv. 

£?E. Tovs jmu tolvvv hiaKpiftoXoyovixevovs OVTOS 



Sfia rfj rekevTrj yeyovevai ev re 

km. oXov. I. e. the use of the 
aorist yev6p.evov implies that 
an action has been completed. 
Cf. Theset. 155 b, c. 

1. fro ev jjf] These words 
are in all the MSS., but there 
can be little doubt that they 
arise either from a gloss or 
from some corruption of the 
text. Heindorf conjectured 
-rot/ to okov, which is probably 
right. 

8. aXka fivpla] " You know 
that innumerable other points 
will each be found involved in 
endless difficulties." Cf.Theset. 

155 c j d : Kal SX\a 8r] p.vpia eVi 
[Jivpiois ovras e%ei, e'lnep Kal raiira 

TrapaSegoneda. For an illus- 
tration of the truth of this 
Plato would point to the Par- 
menides. 

12. erepov i£ ciXKov] For the 



variety, cf. Phileb. 57 b : apa 

eWi tis erepas ciWr] Kadapmrepa 
e7no-rrjp.t]s iiuo-TT)pri. And for 
irepl twv e\mpoo~6ev k. t. A., 
Theset. 177 c: nXeico del eirip- 
peovra Karaycocret fj/xcov tov eg 
dpxrjs Xoyov. 

Ift.Tovs pev Tolvvv K.r.A.] "Well 
then, concerning those who 
treat exactly of Being and 
Not-Being, let so much suffice, 
although the subject is by no 
means exhausted. We must 
now turn and look at others 
who speak less precisely, that 
we may learn from the most 
general survey that Being is 
no less troublesome to com- 
prehend than Not-Being." 

"Let us approach them, then. 
Proceed." 

" I see them, through their 
dispute about the nature of 
Being, engaged in a warfare 



But if 
there is no 

5 Whole, not 
only must 
there be 
plurality, 
(for then 
Being is 
not One) 
but Being 
cannot 
have come 

10 into being, 
still less 
exist, for 
nothing is 
completed 
but as a 
whole. 
Nor can 
Being have 
number, 
5 for, what- 
ever num- 
ber it has, 
it has this 
as a whole, 
or sum. 



Q 2 



IK) 



nAATONOS 



re 7repi kcu }JLi) iravv [ilv ov ditAi]AuOafi€i>, ujicos 5e p. 245 



which resembles thai of the 

( Hauls and the < k)ds." 
•• What do you mean I" 
•■ The one faction would drag 
everything to Earth out of 
the Heaven of the Unseen, 
literally laying their grasp on 
rocks and trees. For they 
fasten upon everything of this 
kind, and contend uncompro- 
misingly that this alone exists 
Avhich affords resistance and is 
sensible to the touch : so they 
define Being and Body to be 
the same. But they utterly 
despise the rest of the world, 
whoever asserts that a bodiless 
thing has being, and, on hear- 
ing this, refuse to listen to 
another word." 

" They are indeed a fearful 
sort of men. I have encoun- 
tered many of them myself, 
ere now." 

" Yes, and that is why their 
opponents are so cautious in 
their defence, and fight with 
them from some invisible aery 
hold, contending in spite of all 
that True Being consists of 
certain bodiless forms, seen 
only by the mind : but the 
bodies to which the others 
cling, and the realities of 
which they speak, these little 
by little in their arguments 
disintegrate and crumble 
down, and describe them as 
not substance but a moving 
flux of change. Between these 
armies from time immemorial 
a battle has been joined, 
which continues with unabated 
fury." 

(l5-) diaKpij3oXoyovpevovs — aX- 

Xcos XeyovTas] In the former 
class are obviously contained 



all who have hitherto been 
mentioned — the Ionics, Elca- 
tics, Heraclitus, Empedocles : 
and the word ouixp. probably 

means " those who have defined 
precisely the number and the 
kinds of being." Cf.supr. 243 d : 

aims TTconore eVi Kplcriv copprjae 
rov ra ovra 8iopicracr6ai trnaa re 
Kai nold ecrriv. It is less certain 
who are spoken of as diaicp. 
■rrepl tov pj ovtos. Perhaps the 
prohibition of Parmenides is 
alone referred to, perhaps 
Leucippus may be also in- 
tended. It does not seem 
probable that Gorgias, Pro- 
tagoras, Antisthenes, or the 
Megarians (as Heindorf sup- 
poses) are included in this ex- 
pression. The contemporaries 
of Socrates seem to be reserv- 
ed, with those of Plato, for the 
following section (p. 246). The 
meaning of aXXcos is best infer- 
red from that of 8m/cpt/3oXoyou- 
pevovs, to which aXXcos Xeyoi>ra<; 

is opposed. "Those who speak 
with less exactness." " Those 
who do not seek to determine 
the number or the kinds of 
Being." The schools which are 
now to be described are in 
truth engaged with a different 
problem : respecting the nature 
of Being or Essence, whether 
this be ideal or corporeal — a 
question with which mathe- 
matical or numerical exactness 
has little to do. For a simi- 
lar use of aXXws, cf. Hdt. V. 

8 : oXXcos yfj Kpv\p-avres. Crat. 
425 a: f/pus Se del etWp rexvi- 
kcos iniarrjC-upeBa (TKOTre'icrdcu avrci 
ndvTcij ovtco BLeXopevovs, e'tre Kara 
Tponov rd T€ 7Tpu>Ta ovopara K€~L- 
7ai Kai tci vrrrepct, eire prj, ovtui 



2CXM2TH2. 



117 



245- WWtwSs €)(€T(O m TOV? §6 CtAAcO? XtyOVTOLS (XV 0€aT€OV, 
IP €K TTOLVTWV el8cOfJL€l' OTl TO OV TOV fXJJ OVTOS OvStV 

246. eviropcoTepov efareiv o ri ttot ecrTiv. 

GEAI. Qvkovv TropeveaOai xprj koll im tovtov?. t 

flE. Kcu fX1]V €01K€ y€ Iv aVTols olov yiyaVTO- 5 We pro- 
ceed to 



Bedadai. aXXws 8e avveipetv prj 
<pav\ov fj Ka\ ov na8' 686v, co (pl\e 
'Eppoyeves, where aWats = prj 
8ieXo/xevovs, as here it is = prj 8ia- 
KpifioKoyovfxivovi , in both places 
with a touch of blame, which 
is here satirically directed by 
Plato against the philosophers 
who were most nearly con- 
temporary with himself. See 
also Legg. i, 635 e, where 
all other existing common- 
wealths are distinguished from 
the Spartan and Cretan con- 
stitutions in the words ri 81a- 
(pepov ev ravrais rals TroXiTeuus 
7} tcus top eiKY] TroXiTeuojxeVojt' 
dvevprjO-opev. 

(i.) iravv pev ov 8ie\r]\vda.pev] 

" We most certainly have not 
exhausted — ." waw is ad- 
verbial to the phrase ov bie\rj- 
\vdapev. navTas, which Hein- 
dorf adopted from the quo- 
tation of EusebiuSj is less 
forcible. Cf. Prot. 338 e, 

iravv pev ovk fjdeXev, quoted by 
Stallbaum, who, notwithstand- 
ing, rejects the MS. reading 
here because it is not literally 
true that the early philoso- 
phers had been not at all dis- 
cussed : " Eecensuit enim non- 
nullos quanquam non omnes 
tetigit." But StfAr/A. implies 
either going through them all, 
or discussing them thoroughly. 
Phileb. 51 c : Trdvv pev ovv ovk 
evdvs SijAci io~Tiv. — neipcniov 

pr)v. See an instructive note 



on ov ttuvv in Mr. Cope's Gor- 
gias. 

2. ix ndvrav] As the result 
derived from all, the same 
which has now been derived 
from a part only. Cf. Theaet. 
1 7 1 c, e£ cmavTcov, and note ; 
Ar. Met. VII. 998 a; and vid. 
infr. 251c: iva roivvv Trpbs dnav- 
tcls Tjplv 6 Adyos 7/ K.T.X. 

OTl TO OV TOV pi] OVTOS ] 

This notion was advanced with 
some hesitation supr. 242 c : 
prj ttt] TeTapaypevoi pev 3>pev. 
243 C : Tdxa to'lvvv 'laws k.t.X., 
and is more decidedly enforced 
infra 250 d. 

5. yiyavTnuaxia] Plato notices 

amongst contemporary philo- 
sophers a conflict between ma- 
terialists and idealists, which 
he compares to the war of the 
Giants with the Go^s : the 
terrible children of the earth 
are seen hurling blind defi- 
ance at their opponents, who 
fortify themselves securely 
from this rude violence in an 
invisible Heaven. In a similar 
spirit, in the Politicus, p. 291 a, 
the statesmen of the day are 
compared to Centaurs and 
Satyrs and other monstrous 
forms. See Coleridge's Friend, 
vol. iii. p. 129. — The mate- 
rialist has no way upwards 
His " element is below." The 
idealist finds his way up, but 
not down again. 



118 



I1AATQN02 



examine a 
different 
order of 
philosophic 

schools, 

Bomewhat 

in their 
announce- 
ments, 

whose end- 
less conflict 
respecting 
the nature 
of essence 
resembles 
that of the 
Giants 
with the 
Gods. 
The advo- 
cates of a 
bodilyprin- 
ciple,whose 
touchstone 
is the sense 



jxaxia T19 eivai 8 to. ti)v a/i(f)i(Tfir)T7)(nv irep\ ttjs P- 246. 
ovcrLas irpos aXX^Xovs. 
0EAI. n<Sff; 

SE. Ol fxeu els yrjv itj ovpavov kcll tov uopdrov 
Siravra eXKOuat, reus" \<cpo~\v v-Ttyyws irerpas kcu Spvs 
TrepiXapLfiavovTes. rwu yap toiovtojv tya-KTQp.tvoi 
iravTOdv hilayypiipvTai tovto thai \xovov o irapiyzi 
TrpoafioXyv kcu eira^iqv tlvol, tolvtov crcofia koll ovoiav 
6pi(pp.evoi, tcop <5e aXXcov, e'l tis (f)rjcri firj acopta ^x ov ^ 
toeivai, KOLTa<ppovovvT€$ to irapajrav koll ov8ei> eOe- 
Xovres aXXo aKoveiv. 

0EAI. 'H Seivovs eipr/Kas avbpas' rjdr/ yap Kal 
eyco tovtoov avyyols 7rpoaerv)(ou. 



I. TTep\rr]S ovaias] No longer 

tov ovtos. This change of ter- 
minology indicates that we are 
entering on a new and more 
abstract phase of philosophy. 

5. eXKovcn] " Drag by main 
force." The word is often 
used to indicate perversity in 
argument. Cf. iufr. d : rav els 
o~a>pa iravra eXKOvrcov /3tg. ov- 
pavos is elsewhere identified by 
Plato with the visible region, 
e. g. Rep. 6, 5°9 e : Sparov, Iva 

pfj ovpavov elirav 8okS> croi ao(pi- 
£eadac Trepl to ovopa. Earth 
and Heaven are here opposed, 
as there the visible and intel- 
lectual worlds. 

dre^vcos irerpas Kai 8pvs irepi- 
Xapftdvovres] C. F. Hermann 
inserts as before ireTpas. This 
is quite unnecessary, and takes 
from the liveliness of the image. 
The metaphor is continued, and 
the materialists are said, like 
the earth-born monsters, to lay 
their grasp on rocks and trees 



in their warfare. In Hesiod it 
is the hundred-handed sons of 
Heaven and Earth, the allies of 
Zeus, who throw the rocks up- 
on the Titans. Theog.675-7 15. 
But see Hor.Od.III. 4 : evulsis- 
que truncis Enceladus jaculator 
audax. irerpa Kal 8pvs are also 
in Homer the symbols of in- 
animate nature, as in the line 
quoted by Socrates in his De- 
fence : ov yap djrb 8pvos rjXvdov 
ovd' dno Trirprjs. Cf. Rep. 8, 
544 e : rj o'lei eK 8pvos iroBev 77 Ik 
nerpas ras noXiTelas yiyveaduL ; 

6. i(paTrT6pevoi] " Fastening 
upon all such objects" (for the 
purposes of their argument). 

Q. rav 8e ciXXav, ei tis (pr]0~ij 

" But, utterly despising all 
others, whosoever says that 
what has not body exists, and 
refusing to hear from them an- 
other word." Stephanus added 
ti, which is found (after tis) in 
C. H. re. B. 

13. av^vols TTpoo-ervxov] Cf. 



2CM>I2TH2. 



119 



246. SE. Toiyapovv oi irpos olvtovs dfj.(l)ta^r]TovvT€9 
fiaXa evXaffcos avwOev eh dopdrov 7ro6ev dfAvvovTou, 
vorjTa OLTTa kou daco/xara elSrj fiiatpiievoi. ri]V dXrj- 
6ivrjv ovaiav eivai' rd 8e eKelvcop acofxara kou ttjv 
Xeyop.evr]v vtt clvtwv dXrjOetau Kara a lllk pa Sia- '. 
c Opavovres kv rot? Xoyois yevecriv dvr ovaiav (fiepo- 
\x(vr\v riva irpoaayopevovaLi/. eV fxeacp 8e irep\ 
ravra aVAero? dfKporepwv \xdyr) tis, 00 Qeacryre, dei 
£vv£<jtt\k£v . 

GEAI. 'AXrjOij. 

HE. Hap' dfifpolv Toivvv tolv yevolv Kara fxepo? 
Xafioo/Aev Xoyov virep rj? Tidevrai rr\<s overlap. 

GEAI. Ylws ovv 81] Xrj^ofieOa ; 



Cratyl. 429 d : 7 Ap" on -^ivSt) 

Xeyeiv to ivapdirav ovk eariv, apd 
o~oi tovto Bivarai 6 Ao-yos ; avxvol 
yap nves oi Xeyovres, Si (plXe Kpa- 
rvXe, Kai vvv Ka\ irdXat. 

(13.) Trpoo-iTvxov] So the Zur. 
editors. Heincl. and Stallb., 
with some MSS., trepiiTvxov. 
" Encountered" suits the pas- 
sage better than " lit upon." 

1. Toiyapovv] Sc. are deivol 
ovres. 

2. pdXa evXaP&s] " With ex- 
cellent heed." In fact never 
crossing weapons with their 
opponents. For each denies 
the existence of that by which 
the other holds. 

3. fHiago/ievoi] " Contending 
vehemently in spite of all diffi- 
culties ;" like eXKovres above. 
Cf. supr. 241 e : /3ia£e (T&u to re 
p.r) w cjs ecrn Kara, n ko\ to ov av 
irdXiv cos ovk ecrn 7177, i. e. u to 
force the conclusion even against 
the authority of Parmenides." 

4. ttjv Xeyopevrjv — dXrjdeiav] 

" The reality of which they 



speak." alrjdeia, = reality, seems 
to have been a favourite term 
with the opponents of ideal 
philosophy in Greece. Cf. 
Theset. 152 d and note. 

5. Kara apiKpa biadpavovres iv 
toIs \6yois] Cf. Theeet. 179 d : 

Tvpoo~ireov ovv iyyvrepco, Ka\ <r/ce- 
irreov tt)v <pepop.evrjv ravTTjv ovaiav 
biaKpovovra, e'lre vyus ('Its tradpbv 
(fideyyerai. 

7. iv pecrco 8e irepl ravra] 

" Betwixt these armies on this 
theme is waged an endless 
war." 

8. aTrXeros P^XI — <*"] Cf. 

Legg. 1 o, 906 a, of the conflict 
between good and evil : pdxq 

8rj, (papev, dddvaros io~Tiv rj toi- 

ai>Tr). Phileb. 15 e : tovto ovre 
p.T] iravcriTal wore ovre ijp^aro 
VVV. Tim. 28 a: vTTep rjS Ttdev- 
Tai Trjs ovo-ias. I. e. vnep Trjs 
ovo-'ias, r)v TidevTCU. 

12. Xd^copev Xoyov] Cf. Theset. 

1 6 1 b : Xoyov nap' eTepov cro0ov 
Xa^etz/. Meno 7 O d : Xappdveiv 
Xoyov KaliXeyxe iv. Rep. I, 337 b. 



thing to ' 
earth out 
of the hea- 
ven of the 

Unseen. 
From 

thence an 
army, 
" lapped 
in proof 
eterne," 
carefully 
defend 
their aiiry 
citadel of 
, bodiless 
forms, and 
by their 
arguments 
reduce to 
a flux of 
transitory 
production 



120 



I1AATON02 



the seem- 
ing reality 
of yonder 

l)0ilily sub 
stance. 



The prin- 
ciples of 
either 
school are 
called in 
question, 
and Thea?- 
tetus en- 
gages to 
impart 
to the 
Stranger 
the tenor 
of their 
replies. 



HE. Ylapa filv tcov ev eldeaiv avTifv TiOefievcav p. 24C 
paov' i)fiepc£>TepoL yap' irapa. 8e tcov els acofia iravTa. 
4\k6vtcou (3la yaXeiroiTepov, taco? <5e kou <x;(e<$oi> d 
aSvvarov. a A A' d>8e poi <5eu> 8ok€l wept olvtmv 
S 8pav. 

0EAI. n«?; 

HE. MaAiara /LteV, el ttt\ 8vvaTov rjv, epyco /3eA- 
t'lovs avTov? iroieZv el Be tovto ptrj eyyozpel, Aoyw 

7TOL(Ofiei>, V7T0TL$e'fiei>0l VOpLipLCQTepOV OLVTOV9 7} vvv 

loedekovras av anroKpivacrQai. to yap bpLoXoyqOev 
irapa fieXTLovcDV irov Kvpicarepov y to irapa. \ €L P°~ 
vcov' rjixeh 8e ov tovtcov (f)povTi£op.ei>, aAAa Tak-qOes 

^QTOV/JLeV. 

0EAI. 'OpOoTaTa. e 

15 HE. KeAeue 8rj tov? (3e\Tiovs yeyovoTa? diro- 
KplvaaOai aoi, Kal to XeyOev Trap avT&v a(pep- 
fxrjveve. 



3. ^aX€7ra)Tepoi'] The diffi- 
culty of arguing with these 
men is different from that 
found with the Ephesian piov- 
res, who could not be made to 
dwell on an idea, and arises 
simply from their want of dia- 
lectical refinement. Cf. Thefet. 
155 e: eicri yap, S> ttcu, p.a\' ev 
ap.ovo~oi. 

g. vop.ip.a>Tepov] I. e. More in 
accordance with the acknow- 
ledged rules of argument. 

IO. to yap opokoyrjdtv x (L ~ 

povav] For the serious applica- 
tion of this principle, cf. Legg. 

2, 663 C : rfjv 8' aKrjdeiav rrjs 
Kpio-ecos TTorepav Kvpiatrepav eivai 
(fiCvpev ' } norepa rrjv rrjs xapovos 
yfrvxrjs rj ttjv rrjs fteXriovos ; 'Av- 
ayicaiov nov ttjv tt)s dpelvovos. 
12. rjpets he ov tovtcop cppovri- 



Cop.ev\ Cf. Phsedo 91c: av epol 
Treidrjade, apiKpa. cppoi/Ticravres 
"S,u>Kparovs, ttjs 8e dXrjBeias 7ro\v 
paXXov, eav ftev n 8okS> dXrjdes 
Xe'yeiv, ^wop,o\oyr]o-eTe, el 8e pr], 
ttclvti \6ycp di/TiTeipere. Plato 
sometimes insists on the neces- 
sity of individual conviction, 
as in Protagoras 331 c (oi8ev 

yap Seo/xai to el ftovXei tovto /cat 
el aoi 8oKel eXey^eo-daL a\A' ifie 
re Kai (re), Gorg. 472 b, 4*74 
a, b ; sometimes, as here, on 
consistency of argument alone. 
The former is the Socratic, 
the latter the Platonic, mode 
of asserting the supremacy of 
reason. 

1 6. Trap' gvtcov] The preposi- 
tion is introduced because of the 
verb dqbeppfiveve. " Convey from 
them to me the tenour of their 



2CWI2TH2. 



121 



246, 



247^ 



0EAI. Tavr earou. 

SfE. Aeyovroov 8rj dvqrov (coov el (f)aa)u ei- 
vai TL. 

0EAI. ILSy $ oti; 

3*E. Touto 8e ou aco/ia epi^rvxov bjioXoyovaiv ; 5 

8EAI. Udvv ye. 

HE. TiOevres rt rcou ovtodv tyvyfjv ; 

0EAI. Nat. 

SE. T7 8e ; tyvyrjv ov tyjv fiev StKalav, rr)v Se 
aSiKov (fyacrtv eivou, kou tt]v fiev (frpovifiov, ttjv 8ei 
a(ppova ; 

0EAI. Ti/iiyy; 

HE. 'AAA' ou SiKouocrvvT)? eljei kou "jirapovaia^ 
ToiavTrjv olvtwv eKaaTr]v yiyvecrOou, kou tcov evavTiwv 
rr\v evavriav ; 1 

0EAI. Nat, KOU TCLVTa ^VfJLCJXXOrtV. 

HE. 'AAAa p.^v to ye Svvoltov tco irapayiyveo-Qou ™?? he 
kou airoyiyveaOaL iravTms elva'i n (^r]crovo~iv. 
0EAI. Qaal p.ev ovv. 



The coi [•'•- 
reali 1 are 
the more 
difficult, 

Imt.-iu-.- i.l 

tliuir dia- 
lectical 
rudenes8 
and incom- 
petence. 
For the 
sake of ar- 
gument we 
must ima- 
gine them 
capable of 
making a 
wholesome 
answer. 
They ad- 
mit, then, 
the exist- 
ence of a 
mortal liv- 
ing crea- 
ture, which 
is a body- 
containing 
a soul. 
Soul, then, 
exists: and 



righteous 
or un- 
righteous, 
wise or un- 

b HE. Ovam OVV SlKaiOaVVr)? KOU (hpOVnaeWS KOU 20 wise, ac- 

cording as 
the soul has 
righteous- 

and 
wisdom, or 
the reverse. 
Righteous- 
ness and 
wisdom 
(i.e. virtue) 



rrjs aXXrj? apery? kou rcov evavrlcov, koll Srj kou yjsvxrjs 
ev f) ravra eyylyverai, rrorepov bparov kou arrrbv 
eival (paal ri avrcov rj irdvra dopara ; 

0EAI. '2)(eb s bi> ovdev rovrcov ye bparov. 



reply." dcpepprjveve possibly (like 
aX\o39 supr.) imputes to these 
philosophers a want of clearness 
in expression. At all events, 
on the points in question an 
answer could only be obtained 
from them by way of inference. 
Cf., however, Legg. 2, 660 b : 

as (tv Kar Atyvirrov d(p€pp.T]i>eveis, 

where the word means to re- 
port from a foreign country. 



13. 8ikciio(tvi>t)s e|et kci\ fnapov- 

cri'at] " The possession and pre- 
sence of justice." See note on 
Theset. 153 b : 17 S' eV tT) ^x'? 

14. rcov evavricov] Sc. e£« ml 
Tcapovala. The plural suggests 
the conjecture that Plato wrote 
Sikcuoowtjs e£ei kcu (^povrjcreus. 

24. ^xedov — opaTov] Cf.Legg. 
IO, 898 d. 



122 



IIAATQNOS 



are thus 
admitted to 

exist. And 
the soul 
and virtue 
are invi- 
sible. And 
of these in- 
visibles, 
though 
they may 
assert that 
the soul is 
in a man- 
ner bodily, 
theycannot 
maintain 
that virtue 
has a cor- 
poreal 
form. 



HE. TV 8e ; tow TOiovTu>v fxwv acofxu tl Xeyovaiv ]>• 247. 

0EAI. ToVTO OVK€TL KCLTO, TOLVTOL CLTTOKpiVOVTai 

irav, uXXa tt]V fieu \j/V)(i]i> avri-jv 8oK€iP (T(f)lat aco/xa 

5 Tl K€KTrj(70ai, (j)pOVrjCTLV 8e KOU TOUV uXXcOV tKfMJTOV 

on/ r/po)Tr]Kas, aicryyvovTai to ToXfiav 77 fJLrjdeif tcov 
ovTOiv avra bixoXoyelv rj ttolvt duai aco/xara dii(rx v ~ c 
plteaOai. 

aE. 2a0&)s" yap rjfuv, co Gecurr^re, fieXTiov? 

oyeyovaaiv avdpes, hrei tovtcdv 068' av ev eiraLo-)(yv- 

Ousv 61 ye avrcov airaproi re kou olvt6)(0ov€?, dXXa 



1. Ti — i'o-^etv] Join t»i/ tui- 

OVTUIV Tl. 

3. Tovro ovKen] " They an- 
swer this with a distinction, 
saying that the soul appears 
to them to have a bodily form 
of some kind, but with regard 
to wisdom and the other things 
of which you ask, they have 
not the face either to admit 
that these have no being, or 
any longer to insist that all 
things are bodily." 

4. ttjv jiiv ■*\rvxh v ] See De- 
mocr. Fragmenta Physica (Mul- 
lach), esp. § 3. The word 
ivavra does not resume eppovr]- 
aiv k.t.\., but the sentence 
reverts to an independent con- 
struction. Cf. supr. 243 a, and 
note. 

4. crco/na ti K€KTrjO-dai\ The 

invisibility of the atoms of 
Leucippus and Democritus is 
no objection to these philo- 
sophers being included here : 
for these words imply the ex- 
istence of an aopuTOv crw/xa. 

6. to To~\fiav] The inf. has 
the force of a noun. Cf. ovS" 
ai> a> infra. 



7. avTa] See note on airo, 
supr. 245 a. 

11. anapToi] By an accumu- 
lation of similes not unusual 
with him (see Theaet. 169 b, 
Sciron and Antaeus), Plato in- 
troduces an allusion to the army 
of Cadmus rising from the dra- 
gon's teeth, and also to the 
first inhabitants of Attica, who, 
like the Giants, sprang from 
the ground. Cf. Rep. 3, 444 e, 
Qoivikikov ti, and Soph. (Ed. Col. 

1534, (TTTapTCOV O.TT dv8p5lV. 

01 avTa>u anapTol icai avro- 
xQoves] Plato has obviously 
some men in his eye, probably 
the same to whom he alludes 
in Theaet. 155 e. If it is true 
that Archelaus abandoned the 
ideal principle of Anaxagoras, 
and became a purely physical 
philosopher, he is perhaps in- 
cluded, as well as the contem- 
porary followers of Democri- 
tus. (See Introduction to These- 
tetus, p. xxx sqq.) But there 
appear to be some who, though 
holding a material principle, 
are thought capable of being 
improved into the position 



20<M2TH2. 



123 



247* ^LCLTeivoivr av rrau, o /jlt) Bvvcltoi tolls X € P°~ l ijvp.7TL6- 

{<ELV €L(TLl>, 0)9 apa TOVTO Ov8ei> TO TTCLpOLTTOLV IcTTLV. 

0EAI. ^ythov ola 8loli>oovi>toll Aeyeis. 

aE. UolAlv to'lvvv dvepcDTGO/uLev avTOvs' el yap tl 
koli crpLLKpov iOeXovcTL T(hv ovTcov avyxoopelv dcrco- 5 
d ploltov, itjapKel. to yap eiri re tovtols dpLa /cat eV 
tKeivoLs oaa eyei awpta Ijv/Mpvt? yeyovo?, els o /3Ae- 
7TOVT69 dpLfpoTepa elvai Xeyovai, tovto olvtols prrreov. 
Ta^' ovv to~co9 av diropolev' d Se tl tolovtov irewov- 

OaCTL, 0-K07T€L, 7TpOTeLVOpL€VCOV TjpLCOV, dp tOtAoLCV OLV io 

8e)(€cr0aL /cat 6/ioAoyuv tolovS elvaL to ov. 



which is assigned them in 
what follows, who by dialec- 
tical pressure can be brought 
to substitute force for body. 
Perhaps the " disciples of Pro- 
tagoras," who said that "sen- 
sation was knoAvledge," are thus 
viewed as a more refined sort 
of materialists. If so, the irony 
with which, in the Theaetetus, 
they are opposed to the unini- 
tiate becomes manifest. Cer- 
tainly the words, ttjv \eyopivqv 
V7T aircjv akt)6eiav Kara afxiKpa 
Siadpavovres iv rois \6yois yeveaiv 
clvt ovcrias (pepop.evr]v riva npoa- 
ayopevovatv, are an exact de- 
scription of the " Megarian" 
treatment of Protagoras in the 
Tkeaetetus, and it may be that 
the notion of making the men 
better for the sake of argu- 
ment is suggested by the deve- 
lopment of the " sensational 
idealism," which is attributed 
to him in that dialogue. It 
is equally possible, however, 
that the argument is pointed 
at a supposed inconsistency be- 
tween the physical and ethical 



writings of Democritus. See 
the views on " the soul," 
"justice," "wisdom," in De- 
mocritus Fr. 1, 4, 5, 6, 35, 
36, in, 127, 128, 129, 135 
(Mullach's edition). 

I. ttov 6 prj dvvarol — elcri] 

For the " pendent" constr. of 

7rai>, cf. SUpr. 219b: irav, onep 

k.t.X. tov p.ev ayovra -noielv, to 

8e dyopevov Troieio~8al 7rov(pdp.ev. 

rats X e P ai o-vp.7ru£eip] The 
description of the dpvrjToi in 
Theset. 155 e is closely parallel, 

01 ov8ev oAXo olopevoi elvai rj ov 
av dvvcovTai dirplg to'lv %epo'iv 
\a(3eo-8ai. Cf. Emped. 1. 356 : 

fjpeTfpais rj X e P°~ l ^afaw' rjirep 
re p.eyio~Tr) neidovs dvOpwiroicriv 
dpatjiTos els (ppeva 7tlttt(i. 

6. eiri re toiitois] Cf. Theset. 
185 c, supr. 243 d, e. 

7. £vp(pves yeyovbs] " Which 
arises as a common nature." 

10. irpoTeivopevav] The word 
TTpoTelvea-dai in this sense ac- 
quires a technical use in Aristo- 
tle, cf. Topica, p. 164, b. 2 : eo-n 
ydp, <os dnXas ehrelp, 6 BuiXckti- 
kos 6 irpoTaTLKos <a\ eWrariKdV 



We mip- 
pose tin m 
to make 
this ad- 
mission i 
though it 
is far more 
than the 
aboriginal 
" Sons of 
Earth" 
would have 
admitted. 
We then 
ask, If tli e 
name ' ex- 
istent' ap- 
plies to 
things both 
visible and 
invisible, 
what is the 
common 



R 2 



124 



IIAATONOS 



nature 

which is 
thus pre- 
dicated of 
both ? 

Lrst Hi' 

shouldhave 

to pause 
for a reply, 

we propose 
to them the 
following 
definition 
of Being : 
' All that 
is by nature 
capable 
either of 
doing or 
suffering.' 
Being is 
potency, 



0EAI. To irolov 8)] ; Ae'ye, /ecu rdya dcropeOa. p. 24; 

HE. Ae'yO) 81) TO KCU blTOiaVOVV K(lKTY)\x£vOV Sv- 

vapiv, e\r elf to iroLtiv erepov otlovv 7re(j)VK09, tur 

ely TO TTClOeiv KOU apLKpOTOTOV V7TO TOV (fjavXoTCLTOV, C 
5 KOLV €L flOVOV UaOLTTa^ 7TOLV TOVTO OVTOiS thai' TlOtpai 

yap opov, bplfav to. optcc, w? ccttiv ovk aAAo tl ttXtjv 
Svvapi?. 

0Ei^I. 'AAA' €7reiiT€p olvtol ye ovk e'xpvaiv ip tco 
irapovTL tovtov fieknov Xeyeiv, 8e^ovTai tovto. 
[ ° SE. KaXco?' tcrcQS yap av elavaTepov rjp.lv re ko! 



('cttl 8e to TrpoTeLvetrdai, ev iroLelv 
tci likeim (Set yap ev oXcos \r](p6r]vaL 
npos b 6 Ao'yoy) to 8' ivio-TaaBai 
to ev 7To\\d, r) yap avaipel rj 8i- 
aipel. 

2. Aeyco 8tj] " Well, here I 
give it you." Ae'yw refers to 

Aeye, and 8r) is used, 8eiKTiKcos, 

as in Kal 8r). 

3. etV' els to — (pavXaTaTOv] 

" Either so as to affect another 
thing, or to be affected by the 
least thing in the most trifling 
way." For this use of ttokIv, 
whence the technical word noi- 
t]tik6s in later Greek philo- 
sophy, cf. Theset. 160 a. 

5. k&v el povov elo-aim£\ As in 
the production of an individual 
sensation. Cf. Theset. 157 a. 

TiBepai yap opov 8vvapis] 

Badbam conjectures rldepai yap 

opov cos hlcTTiv ovk aXKo tl ttXtjv 

Bvvapis. Boeckh. conj. Spifav. 
The construction of 6pl£eiv is 
difficult. There is probably 
an ellipse of 8e1v, cf. AeSewcrai 
k.t.\. supr. 235 b. Mr. Grote, 
in his criticism of this dialogue, 
appears to think that Plato 
intended to allow this defi- 
nition to stand. But docs he 



not attach more importance 
than Plato does to wbat is only 
a step, though an important 
step, in the dialectical progress 
of the argument 1 Observe the 
words (247 e), 'lctcos yap av elav- 
CTTepov rjp.lv re Ka\ tovtois eTepov 

av cpaveir). For an application of 
the same notion, cf. Phsedr. 

270 d: a>8e Set Stai/oettr^at 7repi 
otovovv (pvcreois, npcoTov pev, 

airXovv r) iro\vei8es Icttlv eVetra 

8e, iav pev arrhovv rj, cncoTvelv ttjv 
8vvapiv avTov, rtVa 7rpos tl ire- 
cpvKev els to 8pav e%ov rj Tiva els 
to Tradelv vtto tuv. 

6. cos eo-TLv\ Sc. to. ovra. 

9. 8ex 0VTaL tovto] In a simi- 
lar spirit, in Legg. 10, 900, 
Clinias answers for the ob- 
jectors. Compare also the ima- 
ginary youth in the Phsedrus 
(p. 243 e). 

10. KaAws] " They say well." 
Tbis refers to the modification 
of their assent implied in eVet- 

Trep awrot ovk e'xovcriv K.r.A. 

icrcos yap av elo~vo~Tepov 

(pavelrj] Cf. Legg. 7, 820 e : 

Kelcrdco pevTOi KaBairep eveyypa 
\\)CTLpa (K Trjs ciWrjs 7roAtTet'nf, 
eav rj tovs devTas r)pas rj kiu tovs 



20<M2TH2. 



125 



247- TOVTOIS €T€pOl> OLV (f)OLl>eir]. TTpOS /JL€V OVU TOVTOV? 

248. tovto rjiAiv tvTavOa jX€vIt(d ^vvopoXoyqQev. 
0EAI. Mem. 

HE. YIpos 8rj rovs ere'povs Xwfiev, rovs rwv el$a>v 
(f)t\ovs' av 8 7}plv koli tol irapa tovtwv u(])eppyueve. 5 



Befxevovs ifxas /^Sojucor <piko(ppo- 

vrfrai. Rep. 4, 437 a. 

4. tovs t£>v et'Scoi/ (fiikovs] 
The word etSos indicates that 
the men here spoken of are 
Socratics, so far at least as 
the allusion is personal at 
all. Now they are certainly 
not Cynics ^KvTivBeveioi m\ 
01 ovras ciTraidevTOi), still less 

Cyrenaics, with whom the only 
" essence" was a succession of 
momentary ndBrj. They are 
Socratics under an Eleatic or 
Pythagorean influence. Pro- 
clus, indeed, (Comment, in 
Parmen. p. 149) takes it for 
granted that Plato here al- 
ludes directly to the Pythago- 
rean school, whom Aristotle 
includes with the Platonists 
amongst the advocates of a 
" motionless essence," tu>v ras 

ukivi']tovs ovaias XcyovrwP, Met. 

XIV. 4, 1 09 1 b. But, besides 
the word eldos, the dialectical 
features and the way in which 
yeveois is separated from ota-ia, 
are inconsistent with this. 
Four possible suppositions re- 
main, if we believe the dia- 
logues to be the work of 
Plato. The "friends of forms" 
are either (1) Megarians (since 
Schleiermacher this has been 
the most general impression) ; 
or (2) Plato himself at an 
earlier stage ; or (3) Pla- 
tonists who have imperfectly 
understood Plato. The fourth 



hypothesis combines (2) and 
(3). The theory of Socher, 
who imagined the ' Sophist' to 
be a Megarian critique of Plato, 
would make the Megarians, in 
contradiction to the little which 
we know of them, to be the 
advocates of hvva^is, Kivrjais and 
yevccris. In favour of the first 
hypothesis, according to which 
the Megarian philosophers are 
the el8a>v 0/\ot, it may be urged 
that Plato, before writing these 
dialogues, had stood in a rela- 
tion of close intimacy with 
Euclides and the Megarian 
school, and that this passage is 
a friendly criticism of views 
with which he himself had at 
one time strongly sympathized. 
The name afios, expressing the 
object of definition, was a 
common inheritance of the So- 
cratics, and the tendency of the 
Megarians to rest in sharply 
defined, incommunicable ab- 
stractions, appears not only in 
the Sophisms of Eubulides but 
in the objection of Euclides to 
comparison, of which, as Plato 
hints in what follows, the An- 
tisthenean rejection of predica- 
tion and definition was but the 
caricature. As Zeno refuted 
motion by the movement of 
thought, so they by dialectic 
made logic impossible. But on 
the other hand we have no 
warrant apart from this pas- 
sage for supposing that they 



lorce, rc- 
ceptivity, 
in ;i word, 
power. 
Supposing 

this to In; 

;iuc<jpltjil 
for the 
nonce, we 
turn to the 
lovers of 
ideal forms. 



12(i 



IIAATQNOS 



STe distin- 

i^ni-h in 

your dia- 
lectic be- 

twccn la- 
coming and 

Being : 
whereof, ye 
say, we 
have bo- 
dily and 
sensible 
partici- 
pation in 
the former, 
but mental 
andratioci- 
native par- 
ticipation 
with the 
latter 
alone, 
which is 
eternal, 
whereas 
Becoming 
is transi- 
tory and 



BEAI. Taur earou. p. 248 

aE. Yeveaiv, Tifv 8e ovalav ywp'i'i irov SieAofjLtvoi 
Ae'yere ; rj yap ; 

0EAI. Nat. 
5 SE. Kgu acofxan p.tv 77/xa? yevecrei oY alaOrjaeois 
KoivcDveiv, 81a Xoyicrpov 8e ^/v\rj Trpos ttjv ovtcds 
ovalav, r)v del Kara ram a. GKravTCDS ^X eLl> a7 " e 5 7 e ~ 
vkcnv 8e aXXore aAAcoy. b 

0EAI. <f?ap,€i> yap ovv. 

i° SE. To 06 67/ KOlV(£>VUV, CO iravrtov apiCTTOl, TL 



departed so far from the Ele- 
atics as to admit a plurality of 
C1S77. Euclides said that Being, 
or the Good, was one, though 
called by many names. And se- 
veral points in the description 
are favourable to the view to 
which we have seen reason 
to incline, which differs but 
slightly from those of Ueber- 
Aveg and of Mr. Grote : that 
Plato, while developing his 
own theory of knowledge with 
greater clearness, administers 
a gentle reproof to some of 
his own followers, who held 
tenaciously to a conception of 
the e"i8rj, based on immature 
statements of his own, and 
mixed with Eleatic and Pytha- 
gorean elements. (See the In- 
troduction to the ' Sophist.') 
The points which make for this 
conclusion are the following: 

— vo-qra cirra not dcrmpaTa e'l8r] 
(246 b) ; a-a/iari — SY alcrdi'jo-ems 

Koivoivdv 8ia \oyi<Tjxov 8e y}n>xf] 

7rp6i ty]v ovtcos ova-'iav — de) Kara 
ravra coo-auras *X UV ( 2 4-8 b) ; 
the WOl'ds a> ndvTCOV apiUTOi, 

which might well be aimed at 
friends and pupils by Plato (cf. 



Theset. 148 b : "Apiara y dv6pa>- 
7rcov, 6} 7rai8es) " and eytb 8e tcreuj 
8ia crvvrjdeiav, supposing Plato to 

speak here as if in his own per- 
son : also fip.epu>Tepoi supra. 

2. Teveaiv, ttjv 8e ovalav] Cf. 
SUpr. 221 e : vcvo~tikov pepovs, 
to 8e 7re£ov, and note. This 
omission of pev, like many 
other idioms which might ap- 
pear to be of late growth, is 
found already full-blown in 
Homer. 

5. u-wpaTi] Dat. of the in- 
strument, answering to -fyvxfi in 
what follows. 

yeveaet] Dat. after KOiva- 

vfiv, answering to npos — ovo-lav. 
7. yeve&iv 8e] The end of the 
sentence reverts to the begin- 
ning, turning out the obverse 
side of the chief statement, as 
so often in Plato. 

IO. To 8e 8r] KOivooveiv] The 
introduction of this word, which 
plays an important part in the 
sequel, should be noticed, as 
the emergence of a fresh ele- 
ment in the evolution of the 
thought. Cf. Gorg. 464 c. And 
see Rep. 6, 490 b. 



2CXM2TH2. 



vzi 



248. tovO' v/jLcis eV dp.(f)oiv Xe'yeiv (pcopev ; dp ov to i/0i> 
5t; Trap rjpcov prjOev ; 

0EAI. TottoIov; 

SE. YlaOrjpa ?; iro'irjpa e/c 8vvap.ea)9 twos oltto 
twv irpos aXXrjXa ijvvwvTcov yiyvoptevov. Ta^ ow, 
w QeaiTTjTe, avT&v ttjv Trpo? ravra airoKpicnv av piev 
ov KaraKovei9, eyco 8e 'laws 8id avvrjOeiav. 

0EAI. TtV ow 81) Xeyovai Xoyov ; 
c iH'E. Ou orvyxfopovo-LV rjpuv to vvv 8rj pr/Oev irpbs 
tovs yrjyeve'is overlap ire pi. 

0EAI. To Trolov ; 

aE. \kclvov eOepev bpov irov tcov ovtcov, otolv to) 
iraprj rj tov irdcryeiv 77 8pav kou irpos to crpuKpoTaTOV 
8vvapas ; 

GEAI. Not. 

SE. E[/)oy 5?) Tama To8e Xeyovaiv, otl yeviaet 
ptev pi€T€o~TL tov irda\etv /cat iroitiv 8vvdpec£>s, irpos 
8e ovalav tovtcov ov8eTtpov ttjv 8vvap.LV dppLOTTeiv 
(pacriv. 

I. eV a^Kpotv] Sc. yereffecos 



(cat ovaias. 

4. eK Suwi/xecos Ttfos yiyvo- 

lievov] The account of sensation 
in the Thesetetus belongs to the 
line of thought which is here 
indicated : only the " power" 
is not there inferred from the 
act — since agent and patient 
are regarded as having no ex- 
istence except in act. Theast. 
157 a: °^ Te jup Koiovv earl rt 
irp\v av tc3 iraax^vTi tjvveXdrj, ovre 
ndcrxou, 7rp\v av rw tvoiovvti. 

7. 8ca (rvvrjdeiav ] If the 

Stranger is speaking in his 
own person, these words may 
naturally enough point to the 
contemporary Eleatics, i. e. the 



school of Megara. But if Pla- 
tonists are meant, the author 
must be supposed to speak 
from behind the mask ; as 
happens sometimes in the 
Laws. Cf. Kep. 9, 583. 

16. Cti yev. — (paaiv] "That Be- 
coming has part in the power 
of doing and suffering, but 
that active and passive are qua- 
lities whose force is wholly 
inapplicable to being." The 
meaning of Swa^eas here is 
something between " power of 
acting " and " the power that 
is inherent in action." 

18. rfjv 8vvap.1v] The word 
appears to be used here in a 
slightly different sense from 



fall of 
change. 
Well, fair 
sirs, but 
what is thi 
common 
nature of 
which ye 

5 too apeak, 
under the 
name of 
' participa- 
tion?' Shall 
we explain 
this by the 
definition 
which we 
just now 
gave to 
your oppo- 
nents, as 
an active 
or passive 
energy- 
arising 
from some 
power ? 

j - The Stran- 
ger's prac- 
tised ear 
discerns 
that from 
theirserene 
height they 
reply with 
scorn. Be- 
coming 
may have 
part in 
agency and 
passivity : 
but such 
language 
is inappli- 
cable to 
Being. 



128 



IIAATQNOS 



Without 
question- 
ing the 
propriety 
of this, we 
ask a fur- 
ther ques- 
tion : 

' Whether 
the soul 
knows, and 
whether 
Being is 
known V 
On their 
assenting 
to this, we 
persevere : 
' Is there 
agency, or 
passivity, 
or both, in 
knowing, 
or in being 
known 1 ?' 
They must 
of course 
say, 'Nei- 
ther.' 
They will, 
however, 



0EAI. Ovkovv Key ova l rt ; p. 248 

HE. Ylph? o ye XtKTtov y/xiu otl oeopeOa Trap 
avrwv en TTvOeaOat aa(j)eaTepoi>, ei 7rpoaopoXoyov(rL d 
ttjv fxev \j/v)(i]i> yiyvaxjKeiv, ttjv o* ovaiav yiyvm- 
5 (TKecrOou. 

0EAI. <&ao-\ prjv tovto ye. 

SE. Ti oY ; to yiyvtoo-Ktiv rj to yLyimcrK€0~6ai 

(fia.T6 TTOirjpa i] iraOos rj apcjyorepov ; rj to peu ttol- 

07] pa, to oe Odrepov ; ?} iravTamaaLV ovherepov ov- 

Serepov tovtwv peTa\ap(3dv€ii> ; SrjAov coy ovSt'repou 

ouderepov' Tavavrla yap av rcuy e\nrpoaQev Xeyoiev. 

GEAI. Mav0dva>. 

SE. To <5e d>9 to yiyvcoaKEiv eXirep eo~Tai iroteiv 



bwdfieas immediately preced- 
ing, and more akin to the 
common one of " nature," "im- 
port," " meaning." Cf. Rep. 
6, 511 e. 

8. rj d/KpoTepov] I. e. Are the 
mind and the object of the 
mind each at once active aud 
passive in knowledge 1 

Spinoza postulates the acti- 
vity of mind, cf.Eth.II. Deff. 3. 
Explic. : " Dico potius concep- 
tum quam perceptionem, quia 
perceptions nomen indicare 
videtur mentem ab objecto 
path At conceptus actionem 
mentis exprimere videtur." 

13. For to be, or to be ye (sc. 
(palev av, cf. (flare — av — Xe'yoiev 

supr.), cf. Legg. 3,676 c : dcf> ov 

7ro\eis t elo~\ k.t.X., boKew civ irore 
KaravoTjo-ai xpovov nXijdos oaov ye- 
yovev ; Ovkovv pabiov ye ovbapais. 
T6 8e ye,, <° s anXerdv re nai dprj- 
Xavov av e'lrj. lb. I, 640 : t6 

fikv yap — as 6p6bv ap^ovra 

eivai, uavOdveis. lb. 5, 735- For 

the continuation of the in- 



direct form, cf. also Theret. 
171 d: r) Kal ravrrj paXtora lara- 
o~6ai [sc. (paipevj rbv Xoyov. 

There is some difficulty 
about the arrangement of the 
speakers. Rejecting the read- 
ing of Stephanus and Hein- 

dorf, 6. brfXov — Xeyoiev. £?. 
Mavddvoo robe ye, we have to 

choose between that of the 
Zurich editors, 3. bijXov — Ae- 

yciev. 6. Mav6dva>. 3. To be 

ye — (or to be), where the 
Stranger answers his own ques- 
tion, as in Legg. 10, 894 a : 

tjvlk av t'l nddos fi • brjXuv <u? 

k.tX, and that of Stallbaum, 

G. AijXov — Xeyoiev. S. Mav8dvu>' 

to be ye — , in which, before 
proceeding further, he accepts 
Thesetetus' report of the an- 
swer of the elbebv cp!\oi. The 
former is more in keeping 
with Plato's later manner, and 
makes the anacoluthon easier. 
It has, therefore, been retained. 

13. to yiyvwo-Keiv Trao-^eii/] 

The distinction between the 



2CXM2TH2. 



129 



248. ti, to yiyvcoo-KopLevov dvayKalov av ijvpLfialveL ira- 
e cryeLV. ttjv ovoriav hr) /caret tov Xoyov tovtov yiyvco- 

crKopLevrjv vtto ttjs yvcocreco?, KatT oaov yiyvcoaKerai, 
Kara toctovtov KLvelaOat Slol to irao-yew, o drj (fiapLtv 
ovk av yeve'crOai irepl to ypepLodv. 

GEAI. 'OpOm. 

SE. T7 Se irpos Aioy ; chs dX^Ocos KLvqcrLV koll 
farjv Kai ^rv\r)v koll (ppovrjcriv 1) paSlto? 7T€La0r)a6- 

pLeOa Tffl 7T0LVTe\(OS OVTL pLT) TTOLptLVOLL, pLl]§6 {rjV CLVTO 

249. pLr]8e (Ppovelv, dXXa, aepLvov koll dyLov, vovv ovk e^ov, 

aKLVYjTOV CCTT09 eivOLL ', 

0EAI. &uvov p.(vT av, co Ijeve, Xoyov avyyco- 
polpLev. 

SE. 'AAAa vovv pc€v e)(€LV, £tor)v 8e pLt], (pcopev ; 

GEAI. KaiTrwss 

HE. 'AAAa Tama \x\v dpLfpoTepa ivovT avTco 
XeyopLev, 01) pLyv iv ^v\fj ye (pr/cropLev avTO eytLV 



active and passive verb, which 
probably appears here for the 
first time in Western litera- 
ture, is used to suggest that 
knowledge is a movement or 
process of some kind. Compare 
the use made of the grammati- 
cal distinction of ovopa and pqpa 
below, p. 262, and of the singu- 
lar and plural numbers above, 
p. 238. 

IO. aepvbv Kai ayiov\ There 
is an allusion to the statues of 
the gods. Cf. Phsedr. (of 
paintings) : ecrr^Ke pev cos ££>vtci, 
eav 8 avepr) ti, o~epv(bs iravv 

aiya. Phileb. 24, 53 d. Tim. 30b. 
These words are wrongly con- 
nected by some interpreters 
with vovv. (e. g. Hegel, Cousin.) 



For the thought, compare a 
striking passage in the Laws, 
967 a-e, where it is said that 
the deepest study of astro- 
nomy, instead of encouraging 
the notion of a blind neces- 
sity, leads directly to the sup- 
position of a celestial mind 
or minds : viratTTeveTo to vvv 
ovtcos dedoypevov, oaoi tjjs dicpi- 
fteias qvtwv tjtttovto, onus pi'jTTOT 
av ctyv)(a bvra ovtcos et? aKpl- 
fteiav davpao-Tols \oyio-po7s av 
ixpr]To, vovv pr) KeKTi]peva, where 

the same result is reached 
a posteriori which is here ap- 
proached a priori. 

11. elvai] "Exists," in the 
emphatic sense. 



make 

tlii.s hypo- 
thetical ad- 
mission, 

that, if to 
know is 
activity, to 
lie known 

5 must be 
passivity. 
In which 
case.Being, 
in so far as 
it is the 
object of 
knowledge, 
is passive, 
and there- 
fore in this 
respect, is 
not at rest, 
but in mo- 
tion. 
And, the 
instant we 
touch on 
this con- 

r . ception, 
there is 
borne in 
upon us 
the convic- 
tion that 
Perfect 
Being can- 
not be in a 



130 



IIAATONOS 



state of 

Ilirlv nega- 
tive repose, 

a sacred 
form 
without 
thought, 
or life, or 
soul, or 
motion. 
For, as 
there is no 
thought 
without a 
soul, so 
that which 
has soul 
cannot be 
devoid of 
motion. 
Hence 
motion is 
insepara- 
ble from 
thought. 
But, on the 
other hand, 
thought is 
equally 
impossible 
without a 
principle 
of perma- 
nence and 
rest. 



0EAI. Kou tlv av erepou eypi Tpbirov ; p. 249 

S?E. 'AAA« Sfjra vovv ptev kcu <^coi]v kcu i\rvyr)V, 
CLKivrjTov fxevroL to 7rapa.7rai>, eu\j/V)(ov bv, ecrTuvai ; 
0EAI. Ylavra epoiye aXoya tolvt eivai (f)aiveTai. h 
5 3*E. Kat to Kivovpevov oV; /cat KLwqtriv avyxcopr)- 

T€OU CO? OVTOL. 

0EAI. Urn 8 ov; 

SE. &ivfi(3alv€i 6" ow, co QeaiTr]T€, aKivrjTcov re 
ovtcov vovv prfic-vi irep\ p.r)8c-vo? elvac p.rj8ap.ov. 
10 GEAI. KopLiSfj ptev ovv. 

SE. Kat ixrjv eav av (pepopeva roll KivovpLeva 
ttolvt eivai o-vy\copcop.ev, kcu tovtco tco Xoyco tcwtov 
tovto €K tcov ovtcov itjaiprjcropLev. 

GEAI. ILSy; 
*5 2JE. To /cara Tama /cat tocravTcos /cat 7repl to 
avTO 8ok€l croc x w /°^ crTaoreca? yevecrOai ttot av ; c 

GEAI. OvSapm. 

SE. Tt 6" ; avc-v tovtcov vovv KaOopa? bvTa rj 
yevoptevov av /cat ottovovv ; 



1. exoi] " In what other 
way could Being hold them ] " 
This sense of e^oi is deter- 
mined by ex*iv preceding and 
the accusatives following. 

3. aKtvrjTov — ep^vxov ov] The 

cogency of this argument is 
best seen by comparing Phaedr. 
245 c, Legg. 10, 895 b, c. 
See also Arist. Eth. Nic. X. 8, 
of the life of the gods : aXka 

pr/P Ijjv ye iravres vneiXrjcpapev av- 
tovs Kcu evepyelv cipa' ov yap 8r) 
KaBevbeiv cocnrep tov '~Ev8vpicova. 

Metaph. XI. 1072 b : kcu far) 8e 

ye xmdpxei' rj yap vov evepyeia 
5. o-vyxoiprjTeov ut ovra] There 

appears to be a logical inver- 



sion in reasoning from " Being 
has motion" to " Motion has 
Being." This, like many of 
Plato's arguments, had the 
Organon then existed, would 
have taken a different form. 
But his thoughts would have 
been substantially the same. 

8. 8' ovv] " It follows from 
this, however." Thesetetus is 
warned to face the consequence 
of his admission : and this is 
implied in the adversative 6V. 

1 2. ravrov tovto] Sc. vovv. 

15. To koto. TavTa] " Do you 
think that permanent unity of 
condition and mode and sub- 
ject could ever arise without 
stability?" 



20cM2TH2. 



131 



249- OEM. "HtacrTa. 

aE. K.gu firju 7rpo? ye tovtov ttolvtL Xoyco [xaye- 
Teoi>, by av eiriaT-qpL-qv ?) (fipovrjaiv ?) vovv dcfjavltcov 
Icr^vpt^rjTaL irepl tlvos birrjovv. 

0EAI. ?(p68paye. 

£?E. Tw 8r] (f)L\ocr6(f)a) kou Tama fidXiara tl- 

fxavTL Tracra, cos* eoiKev, avdyKrj did Tama fxrjre tcov 

ev r) Ka\ ra 7roXXa eldrj Xeyomcov to irdv eaTtjKos 

d d7roSe')(€cr0ai, tcov re av iravTayr) to bv klvovvtcov 

fir)de to irapairav aKoveiv, dXXa KaTa tyjv tcov iral- 



Hence the 
philoso- 
pher, with 
whom 
thought is 
the highest 
being, can 
listen 
10 wholly nei- 
ther to the 



i. "Hiao-ra] This was one 
clear result of the argument of 
the Thesetetus. Cf. also Crat. 
440. 

2. Trpos ye tovtov — paxereov, 

os av] Cf. Theset. 265 e : tovto 

(tovtov, Ast. CODJ.) fifj dnoSexa- 
p.e6a, bs civ Ae'yi?. 

3. bs av — lo-xvpl^rjTacl Not 

merely because of the value of 
thought and knowledge, but 
because such a person stulti- 
fies himself. This is implied 
in the form of expression. 
" He who putting knowledge 
out of sight yet dogmatizes on 
any point." See Theret. 161, 
Euthyd. 286, alib. 

a.<pavi(av] Cf. Theset. 151 
d. d\rj6es dcpavicrai, Aristoph. 
Nub. 972. 

6. T<5 t)r) (piXoo-6(pco\ The 
sentence is continued as if the 
verbal notion in cpiKoo-6(pco had 
been expressed. Cf. Theset. 
1 68 b : dvTi (piXoaocpcov, picrovv- 
Tas tovto to irpdypa. Legg. lO, 
886 a : Oeoyovlav — yevopevo'i re 
cos cop lXtj crav. 

7. tlov ev r) Ka\ ra. 7roXXa eiSi; 

Xeyovrcov] I. e. The older Elea- 
tics, or their more recent fol- 
lowers, the friends of ideas, 



who have just been described. 

I O. KaTa ttjv tcov ivaibcov evxTjv] 

This has been variously inter- 
preted. Heindorf, following 
Schleiermacher : " Secundum 
votum puerorum, ut immobilia 
moveantur, optantium." Stall- 
baum : " Videtur respici ad lu- 
sum quendam puerorum in 
quo ludentes dicebant, 00-a uki- 
vrjTa, Kai KeKivrjpeva e'irj." But 
the words oo~a KeKivrjpeva 

would then be too abruptly 
introduced. Steinhart, in a 
note to Miiller's German 
translation of Plato, suggests 
a new reading : dX\a kutu tt)v 
tcov iraibcov eixrjv, ^vvapcporepa 
Xeyeiv to ov Te Kal to ttclv, ko\ oaa 
aKivrjra Kal KeKivrjpeva. The pas- 
Sage admits of being so inter- 
preted, by laying an emphasis 
on gwapcpoTepa, without any 
change in the order of the 
words. " When asked whether 
Being or the All is at rest or 
in motion, we must say, like 
children in their wishes, 'Both.'" 
We may suppose an allusion 
either to the vagueness and 
impossibility of the desires of 
children, who " cry for the 
moon" (for evx^'j in this sense, 



S 2 



!:;.<> 



nAATQNOS 



■■■ 

of O -I ■ 

of motion 
Init must 
s;ts with 
the chil- 
dren, that 
" both are 
best," when 
lie is de- 
fining the 
nature of 
Being. 



But he 
cannot rest 
there. 



8cov ev^v oara aKivTjTa kul K(Kiv7]//.eva to bv re kul p. 249 
to irav ^vvufx(j)OT€pa Xeyeiv. 

0EAI. Wi-jOeo-TCLTa. 

HE. T7 ovv; dp ovk eVriet/cwsr rj%] ^aiv6p.e6a 7T€- 
5 pi€i.\i](J)ei>ai Tcp Xoyco to bv; 

0EAI. Haw p.ev ovv. 

HE. Bafiai ptevT \av\ apa, (0 QeatTrjTt, coV p.01 
SoKovptev vvv auTov yvcoaeaOai nepi ttjv anropiav 777? 
o-Keyj/eoos. e 

10 0EAI. Ylcos av koll t'l tovt elprjKas; 

HE. 'O pLCLKGCpie, OVK iwOUS OTL VVV €0~pL€V €V 

ayvoia tyj nXe'ccrTr} irep\ avTOv, (pa.Lv6pt.e6a 8e tl Ae- 
yuv rjpuv avTo'is ; 

0EAI. 'E/MOi yovv' oirrj 5' av XeXr/Oapiev ovtcos 
15 e'xpvTes, oi) Travv ^vvbqpu. 



cf. Rep. 5, 540 d : p) ™XV 5oK ff 
ehai 6 \6yos) : or perhaps to 
some common form of expres- 
sion in which they desired all 
things in the universe, move- 
able and immoveable, — or, it 
may be, " sacred and pro- 
fane," KivTjTa Kill dia.vT]Ta, what 
may and what may not be 
touched or stirred. 

2. Xeyeiv] Bodl. Xeyei. 

7. Ba/3al fjievr Tav'f apa\ av 

here is probably corrupt : pev- 
Tot, which some object to, is 
quite in point. The only way 
in which to make anything of 
av would be to take it, by a 
rather bold hyperbaton, with 
the future infinitive : which is 
out of the question. And it 
is better to reject av than to 
read, as Stallbaum suggests, 

fxevT av apa. 

Badham conjectures BaftaL- 



ov uevrapa co QeairrjTe' cos uoi 
8okovu€V vvv avrov yevrjaeadai 
7rep\ ttjv dnopiav rrjs o-Ke^ecos. 
But for j3aj3al — cos 8oKovp,ev, cf. 
Rep. 2, 361 d, /3«/3ai — co <£. TX., 

coy eppcopevcos k.t.A. I propose 

merely to omit av, which has 
probably crept in front supra a, 
Aeivov pevr av, and render, "Ah 
me ! on the contrary, Thesetetus, 
how I fear that Ave shall only 
now begin to know the diffi- 
culty of the question about 
Being." 

IO. IIcos av Ka\ tl tovt e"pr]Kas] 

The form of this question 
determines the punctuation of 
the more frequent form, 7ro>s « 
tovt etwes ' } not 7rcos ; tl tovt 
elnes ; 

14. 'Eciot yovv] Sc. (paivofxedd 
ti Xeyet)/. 

ovtcos exovres] Sc. iv dyvoia 
tji Tr\ei(TTr) ovres. 



20MFTH2. 



133 



p. 249. HE. 2K07T€i 8j] aacpe'crTepov, el Tama vvv £vv- 
0. 250. opioXoyovvTes SiKalcti? av eirepa>Tr)6elpev direp clvtol 
totc rjpciiTco/xeu rovs Xeyovras eivai to ttolv Oepfxbv 
kou ^v\pov. 

0EAI. Ilcua ; VTropvrjcrov p.e. 

HE. Yldvv pev ovv kou 7re1pa.aop.al ye Spav 
tovto epcoTcov ae KaOdirep eKelvov? Tore, Iva ap.a ti 
kou 7rpotcop.ev. 

0EAI. 'Op0m. 

HE. JLlev 8r), Kivqaiv kou o~Tacriv dp ovk ivav- 
TicoTaTa Xeyeis dAXrjAois ; 

0EAI. ITwy yap ov ; 

HE. Kou p,r)i> eivai ye 6/xotW (f)f)S dp.<p6repa avrd 
kou eKouepov ; 
b 0EAI. <&r)pl yap ovv. 

HE. ' Apa KivelaOai Xeycov apt^orepa kou eKare- 
pov, orav eivai avy\wpfj9; 

0EAI. O^apy; 

HE. 'AAA' ecrrdvat arjpaiveis, Xeycov avrd dp.(po- 
Tepa eivai; 

0EAI. Keuwm; 

HE. Tplrov apa ti irapa Tama to ov ev ttj ^rv\fj 



Far tl.i-, 
definition 
i- open t'i 

question 

with which 
we assailed 
the dualists 
in our pre- 
vious argu- 
ment. 
Motionand 
rest are 
opposites. 
Yet both 
are, and 
have part 
in Being. 



Being, 
however, 
is distinct 
from both. 

15 For when 
we say, 
'Both are,'' 
we do not 
mean that 
both are in 
motion, or 
that both 
are at rest. 
Hence 

20 Being em- 
braces 
both, and 
both par- 
take of 



1. EKoVet — \|/-vYpoV] " Con- 
sider then more completely 
whether in accepting this con- 
clusion we do not now deserve 
to be troubled with the ques- 
tion which we ourselves asked 
of those who said that the 
Universe was Heat and Cold." 

6. bpav tovto] Sc. vTTOfxvri- 
crai ere. 

7. tots] Supr. 243 e : tL to 
eivai tovto vno\di3cop.ev vpav ; 

TTOTepOP TpiTOV K.T.X. 



Iva apa ti na\ irpoicopev ] 
"That, while I recal this to 
your memory, we may advance 
a step in the argument." Cf. 
Rep. I, 346 a : Ka\, w paxapie, 
p.T] napa 86£av aTroicpivov, Iva ti 
Kal nepalvcopev, 

19. XXX' eo-Tavai] For this 
use of dX\a, cf. Rep. 2, 382 e : 

dXXa 8(81035 tovs e\6poiis ijfev- 

8oito ; 

22. iv 777 faxd] Cf. Rep. 

6, 484 C : prj8ev evapyes ev 



134 



IIAATQN02 



Being. But 
Being is 
different 
from them 
both, and, 
in virtue of 
her own 
nature, 
neither 
rests nor 
moves. 



T10€LS, COS" V7T €K€ll>OV T11V T€ <JTU.(JIV KOU T7]V KLVr)0~LV p. 250. I 
TT€pL€\0/J.ei>-)]l> (TvXXa(3u)l/, KOU UTTlScOV UVTCOU 7TpO? TT)V 

ttjs ovaius KOLVtoviav, ovtoos tivou Trpoareiire'i dfi(f)6- 
repa ; 
5 GEAI. Ku>Svi>evopL€i> coy aArjOco? rplrov dirojxav- c 
reveaOai ri to ov, otolv klvyjo-lv kou ardaiv dvai 
Xeycofieu. 

HE. Ovk dpa KLvr)cris kou ardor is iarl £vvap.§o- 
repov to ov, aAA' krepov 8rj tl tovtcov. 
w 6EAI. "Eoikcv. 

SE. Kara tt)v clvtov (f)vcnv dpa to ov ovre earr]- 

K€V 0VT6 KlVeiTtU. 

0EAI. 2 X 6 ^. 

3E. Hot Br) XPV T W Bidvoiav en rphruv rov 



rfj yjsv)(rj e\0VTes Trapdheiypa. 
Theset. 155 ^ • Tavra br), oipai 
6poXoyr)para Tpla pdxerai iv rjj 
rjperepa ^i/*??. 

I. ok in ineivov tt)v re crrd- 
criv Ka\ tt)v Kivrjaiv Trept.e)(op6vr]v 
crvWaPow] By deleting the 
comma after Trepiexopevrjv the 
syntax is improved ; and the 
inverted order of the words is 
in keeping with the style of 
the dialogue. "So then you 
conceived of Being as a third 
and distinct kind, under which, 
as embraced by it, you com- 
prehended motion and rest, and 
fixing your attention on their 
common participation in Being, 
you thus applied the term 'ex- 
istent' to them both." 

5. dnopavTevcaBaij I. e. This 

truth of reflection is implied 
in language. Compare Rep. 

6, 505 e ". b drj SicoKei irava ^v^r) 
dnop.avTevop.tvri rt eivai. 



8. Ouk apa — tovtwv] " Being, 

then, is not motion and rest 
taken together, but is distinct 
from these." 

II. Kara — Kivelrai] In the 
spirit of the Parmenides it is 
shewn that Being, which has 
just been said to include rest 
and motion, in its own nature 
neither rests nor moves. For 
the position of ovk, which is 
emphatic, cf. Theaet. 161 a : 
as ovk aii i'xei ovrco ravra. 

The search for Being seems 
here to be relinquished as 
hopeless. The thread of argu- 
ment is not dropt, however ; 
for it is this absolute sever- 
ance of Being from rest and 
motion, after seeming to in- 
clude them, which suggests 
the fresh inquiry concerning 
the nature of difference or 
negation. 



20M2TH2. 13.' 



250. /3oi>Ao/xei>oi> ivapyes tl 7Tfpl avTov nap eavTco /3e- ^T^ 1 * 
37E. Oifiat fiev ovSafioae kri pahiov. el yap tl 



BaLwaaaOai ; «""" 

' 7 fchatathing 

9EAI. Uol yap ; wl,id ' '» 

not at rest 
is not in 
motion, or 

fir} Kiveirai, ttcos ov\ eo~Tr)Kev; y to pr)8a/j.Lo? iarross ™ ce ver8& - 

d 7TCO? OVK av KlVeiTai ; TO Se OV TjfMV VVV e'/CTOy TOVTCOV therefore, 

- \ we ma y 

d/j,(PoTe'poov avoir etyavTai. rj SvvaTov ovv tovto ; take note 

0EAI. UdvTCDV fiei> OVV dSwaTCOTaTOV . have found 

,__, rr\'$ ' /i~ **' » v ' the defini- 

AE. Tooe tolvvv fivqadrivaL oiKaiov eiri tovtol?. tion of 

T N „ Being not 

0EAI. \.0 7TOLOV; iolessdiffi- 

Wl? r /r| x v > zj/ v ... cult than 

Aii. yJTL tov fir) ovtos ep(£>TY]6evTe9 rovvofia e(p that of 

r, , 5, « , / / ' /) ' ' Not-Being. 

o ri 7rore oet (pepeLV, iracrr) o-vveo~ypp.eva airopia, whence 

z we derive 

fJL€/JLV7)0-aL ; a sort of 

/2*"C A T TT" v * despairing 

WJiiAl. Uw? ya/) oy; hope, that 

^"C n/r" ? » »\ ' ' ~ » \ > / iY a ray of 

Aii<. Mcoj> ow ez/ eAaTTOvi tlvl vvv ecrpev airopia. 15 fight u least 

- _ \ % »/ on the one 

e TTepi TO OV, perplexity, 

GEAI. 'E/xoi /xeV, w £eVe, el SvvaTov elirelv, ev l^Ysoiu" 

HE. ToOro /xeV tolvvv evTavOa KelaOco dLrjTroprj- ^ome t^The 
fxevov eVetS?) 8e e£ tcrov to re ov /cat to fit) ov airo- "^f^to 



I. ivapyes tl] Cf. Zvapym, this, but the following remark, 
supr. p. 242 c. for which this prepares the way. 

Trap eavrai] Cf. Theost. 1 46 I 2. o-ni/eo-^o/xe^a ajropi'a] Supr. 

e : Xafielv 'iKavcos nap' e/xaur<5, 237—239. Cf. Theset. 1 65 b, iv 

and note. cppeari crwex6u.evos, where the 

7. dvanecpavTai] " Has risen metaphor is more distinctly 

up before us." Cf. Theoet. kept in view. 
155b: arret ttoV eVrt Tavra ra 18. cpaivofieQa] For the el- 

(pdo-pLaTa iv Tjj T/fierepa ^vxjj. lipse, cf. Theset. 172 c: Ovkovv 

Supr. 231 b : iv t<o vvv Xoycp o-^oX?;i' ayofiev, a> 2d>KpciTes. 2. 

-irapcKpavevTi. Meno 85 d : dva- &aivop,e6a. 
KeKivrjvTai al boi-ai avrai. 1 9. §ir)noprip.£vov\ "A diffi- 

II. "On tov firj Svtos] These culty clearly stated." The 
words are in construction with word occurs in Plato in this 
fiepvrjo-ai. The thing which is technical sense only in the 
"worth taking note of" is not Sophist, Politicus, and Laws. 



1536 



IIAATQN02 



steer the 

li.-nL of ..in 
discourse 

between 
this Scylla 
and that 
Chary bdia 

with as 
little dis- 
grace as 
may be. 



pia? /j.€TeiArj(f)aTOv, vuv k\ir\<i rj8i], ko.6' direp av p. 1'p 
aurcov Odrepov tire dpLvSporepov e'/re (ra(j)e<jT€pou 
aua(f)aivr}TOU } koll Odrepov ovtcos dvacpalvecrOai' kou 
lav av ixrjbdTepov iSeiv 8vva>p.€@a, tov yovv Xoyov, p. 251. 
5 07rr]7rep av 6101 re cofiev eimpeirlcrTaTa, Sioicro/JLeOa 
OVTC09 d/uL(f)ow dfia. 



2. eire djAvdpoTfpov e'lre cra- 

(peo-Tepov'] The latter is chiefly 
meant, but the former is in- 
troduced in accordance with 
Plato's wish to omit no aspect 
of a case. Cf. Rep. 1, 339 b: 

ovrra> 8ij\ov old' el peydXrj. 

5. diacropeda] " We shall 
fend off our argument from 
both :" " Steer clear of them," 
as between Scylla and Cha- 
rybdis, or the Symplegades. 
(Cf. Horn. Od. 12, 219: (ktos 
eepye vrja.) Compare the use 
of bia>6eiodai in Herodotus 
and in Democr. Fr. Ethic. 

20 : kol ovk oXlyas Krjpas ev rco 
/3tw Siaxreai, (pBovov Ka\ £/?Xoz> (cat 
dvapfULTjv. The construction, 
however, is different here, and 
has driven the editors to con- 
jecture — Heindorf Siootjoneda, 
Stallbaum bia<ra>cr6pe6a, C. F. 
Hermann 8ia6t]cr6peda. Of these 
Stallbaum's correction is the 
best, although not agreeing 
well with evTrpenea-Tara. But 
the construction may be de- 
fended, if we take the words 
to mean literally " We shall 
push our argument (vessel) 
through between them both 
(or, so as to avoid both at 
once) with such appearance as 
we may." The genitive dpcpoiv 
is then governed by the 81a in 
composition. Cf. Polyb. 22. 
IX, 17 : 8ia>6. rat craplo-aas 8ia 
Twv rp-qpdrav. 



Badham defends the text on 
slightly different grounds. His 
note deserves insertion here : 
"Juxta difficile esse ostendit, id 
quod est atque id quod non est 
explicare. Hinc auguratur, si 
quid lucis utrivis horum ali- 
cunde accedat, fore etiam ut 
alteram discerni possit : sin 
arnbo in tenebris maneant, 
quid turn ] Disputationem, 
servabimus, dispo?ie?nus, per- 
sequemur ? Imo, ita repelle- 
mus, ut si quis ex ejus quod 
non est natura negotium nobis 
facessit, eundem in eo quod 
est baud minus sibi contradi- 
centem efficianius. Accedit 
quod cum hoc verbo et hac 
sententia evTrpeireo-TaTa egregie 
convenit, at non cum con- 
traria notione, quae conjecturis 
supra commemoratis inest : 
parum enim hospitem Eleati- 
cum Sophistis infensum dece- 
ret speciosam disputationem 
promittere." It may be enough 
in order to defend our interpre- 
tation from this last objection 
to refer the student to Theae- 
tetus 196 e, where the con- 
fession of shamelessness is 
immediately followed by an 
avowal of the determination 
to continue the argument, and 
to infr. 254 d, supr. 241 d, 
especially the word (3iaCeo-dat. 
The unattainableness of a per- 
fectlyj " reasoned" method is 



20M2TH2. 



IS7 



). 251 



9EAI. K«Ac3y. 

£*E. Aeycopev 8r) kclO* ov tlvcl irore rpoirov iroX- 
Xols bvopacrL tclvtov tovto eKaarore Trpoaayopevopev. 

0EAI. Qilov 87) tl\ TrapdSeiy/jLa elire. 

SE. Ae'yo/JL€i> avdpaiirov 8r) ttov 7roAA' clttcl eVo- j 
i'o/nd{pi>T€s, tcl re -)(p(Dpara iiriXpepovTts clvtco kcll to. 
a^rjpara kcll /xeyeOi] kcll /ca/c/ay kcll apeTas, ev oiy 
b ivacn kcll irepoL? fivploi? ov povov avOpwirov clvtov 
dvaL (pape'v, dXXa kcll dyaOov kcll erepa a7reipa, kcll 
rclkXa 8r) Kara tov clvtov Xoyov ovtoo? ev 6kclcttov 



II. b. 3. 

1 •■. ; 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 . ■ 

mean l>y 
giving 

many 
names to 
one thing : 
as white, 
tall, good, 
bad, to 
man : 
whereby 
we afford 
excellent 
diversion 
, to the wits 
of youth, 



continually rising up before 
Plato. 

2. ttoWoIs ovopacri raliTou 
tovto'] This recals the saying 
of Euclides, that the good was 
ev, 7roXXoTs ovopacri KaXovpevov, 
and in so far confirms the 
impression that the Megarians 
have been under criticism in 
what precedes. In this and 
other expressions they had 
perhaps implied a "commu- 
nion" of unity with variety, 
which was inconsistent with 
their logical principles. Com- 
pare also the saying quoted 
in Republic 6, 505 c, probably 
from the same source, that 
to ayaObv is cppovrjo-is dyaBov, 
whose authors failed in their 
attempt to isolate the concep- 
tion of good. 

We are now introduced to a 
new sort of philosophers, who 
serve (like the Si/cr^pei? of the 
Philebus) to reduce those just 
mentioned to the point of ab- 
surdity, and by a crucial in- 
stance to bring the question 
to a clear issue. They are the 
same who are ridiculed in the 



Euthydemus, and amongst 
them Antisthenes is most pro- 
bably included, whether or 
not the word oyjnpadeo-i and 
the phrase vno nevias r. t. (p. 
kt. are meant to convey a co- 
vert allusion to him. The 
passage certainly reads like 
personal satire. Compare Phi- 
lebus, pp. 13, 14, where a dif- 
ferent aspect of the same "child- 
ish puzzle" is described, and 
contrasted with the dialectical 
One and Many ; as also in 
Parm. 129 c,d. See also Phileb. 
37 c. Cognate difficulties re- 
specting Predication are noticed 
by Aristotle, Phys. I. 2, § 15: 

01 pev to ecrTiv acpel\ov, ao-jrep 
AvKo(pp(oV ol he tt)v Xegiv peTep- 
pvdpi^ov, oti 6 avBpamos ov \ev- 
kos eo~Tiv, dXka \e\evKCOTat,' — iva 
prj — 7roXXa elvai notcbo-i to ev. 
For eo-rrovhanocnv infra, cf. supr. 
216 b : t5>v nepl Tas e'pihas 
eo-rrovhaKOTcov. 

3. tovto ] I. e. " Anything 
which happens to be in ques- 
tion." Cf. Thea?t. 199 a: p) 
yap e^eiv T h v (TfiaTTjprjv tovtov 

alov re, and note. 



138 



IIAATQN02 



and of oer- 

fiin an- 

(ii-iit t \ rns. 
w ho, from 
their po- 
verty in 

the having 
of wisdom, 
take pride 
in crying 
out upon 
ns that we 
have made 
the one 
many and 
the many 
one. They 
will allow 
us to say 
that good 
is good, and 
man is man: 
but not 
that man 
is good. 
Such are 
the refine- 
ments on 
which they 
spend a be- 
lated en- 
thusiasm. 
To omit no 
aspect of 
thought on 
the subject 
of Being, 
we address 
to these, as 
well as to 
the rest, 
the follow- 
ing ques- 
tion : 
Shall we 
conceive 



v7ro0e/jL€i>oi irdXiv avrb TroXXa koll iroXXols ovofiacri p. 251 
Xeyoptei/. 

0EAI. 'AAt?^ Aeye«. 

SE. 'QQev ye, olfiai, tols re veois koll twv yepov- 
$t<ov T0I9 6\j/L/JLadeai Qoivqv irapeo-KevaKapLev evOv? 
yap avTikafiecrOai ttolvti irpoyeipov a>s dhvvaTOV ra 
re iroXXtx ev koll to ev noXXd elvai, koll 8rj ttov \aL- 
povtJLv ovk ewvres dyadov Xeyeiv dvOpanrov, dXXa to 
fxev ayaOov ayaOov, tov 8e avOpcoirov dvOpcoTrov. c 
10 evTvyyaveLS yap, (6 QealrrjTe, coy eycp/xat, 7roAAa/a9 
to. roLavTa ecnrovSaKoaiv, evloTe 7rpeafivT€pOLS- dv- 
0pa>7TOL9, /cat i>7To irevias Trjs 7repl (ppovrjaLv KTTjaeCOS 1 
tol roiavTa TeOavpLaKOCTL, /cat Srj tl /cat 7rdao-o(pov 
olofievoLs tout avTO dvevpr/Kevai. 
15 0EAI. Ilaj>i> fiev ovv. 

SE. '\va to'lvvv irpos diravTas rjfXLv 6 Xoyo? fj 
tov? 7rco7roTe 7repi ovala? koll otlovv 8taXe\6evTa?, 
eaTco /cat 7rpb? tovtovs /cat irpbs tovs aXXov?, oaoL? d 
epirpoaQev 8LeLXey/j.e0a, Ta vvv d>? ev epcoTrjaei XeyOrj- 
loabfxeva. 

GEAI. Ta 7rota drj ; 

SE. HoTepov firjTe ttjv ovalav KLvqcrei /cat o~Tao~et 
irpoadTTTa>p.ev firjTe aXXo aAAco p,rj8ev p,r)8evL, dXX 



12. nevlas — KTrjcrean'] Geni- 
tive of respect : " Poverty in 
respect of the possession of 
knowledge." The tautology has 
been objected to, but might 
be paralleled from many pas- 
sages in these dialogues. Some 
passages in the Memorabilia 
and Symposium of Xenophon 
make it probable that these 
words contain a personal allu- 
sion to Antisthenes. 



r»7? nepl ttjv (ppovrjcriv kttj- 
crecos] Cf. Polit. 28 1 e: ttjs 
nepl ra dpfpuapara yevicreass. 

13. iru(T(TO(pov olopevois] Cf. 
Phsedo 90 C : o'iovrai <jo<pa>rarot 
yeyovevat re kcu KaravevorjKiPat 
povoi OTi ovre tS)P Trpaypdrcov 
ovdevos ovdev vyies ovre ra>v 
\6ya>v. 

1 8. earroo] Sc. Xeyopeva, from 
ra — \ex6r)0~6peva infra. 



2CXM2TH2. 



139 



351. a>s a/JLiKTa ovtol Koii dfivvarov peraXapfidveLv dXXij- 

Xcov ovrcos aura ev rots Trap r\\uv Xoyois riOcopev ; 

77 Trdvra els ravrov fjvvdyoopev cos* Sward eTriKOivco- 

vetv dXXrjXois ; ?; ra pev, ra oe pr) ; Tovrwv, co 

e Qealrrjre, rl iror av avrovs irpoaipelcrOaL (prjaaipev ; 5 

0EAI. 'Eyw pev virep avrwv ovSev eyco irpos 
ravra airoKplvaaOai. rl ovv ov KaO' ev diroKpivo- 
pevos e'0' eKaarov ra ijvpfialvovra eaKexj/co ; 

aE. KaAcoy Xeyeis, /cat ri6a>pev ye avrovs Xe'yetv, 
el (3ouAeL, Trpcorov prjdevl prjSev prjoeplav Svvapiv 10 
eyeiv KOivoovlas els prjbev. ovkovv kIvt)cfIs re /cat 
ardais ovdapfj peOeijerov ovalas ; 
252. 0EAI. Ov yap ovv. 

SE. Tt cV ; earai irorepov avrcov ova las pr/ 
7rpoo~KOLva>vovv ; 15 

0EAI. Qvk earai. 

HE. Tayy Sr) ravrrj ye rfj avvopoXoyla Trdvra 



I. a/MiKTa ovra Kai abvvarov 
(sc. bv) p,erdKapfidveiv dXXjjXcoi'] 
The sentence changes to the 
impersonal form. dovi/aTov Bodl. 
AIL Cett. ddivara. 

6. 'Eyco pev — KaXcos Xf-yeij] 
' 'Persons sic distribuendse : 'E-yco 
jxev — diroKp'ivaaOai : Tt ovv — e'crse- 
•fya : KaXaJs \eyeis : Kai riB&piv 

y avrovs k.t.X. Hie, ut ubique, 
respondentis partes Theoeteto 
tribuuntur : sed fraud em fecit 
librariis initium sermonis koi 
ridco/jLev ye, qui abruptior illis 
visus est, non animadvertenti- 
bus Hospitis verba ex iis quae 
supra dixerat continuari." Bad- 
ham. Perhaps : but ko\ nda- 
fiev ye k.t.X. seems too abrupt in 
the rejoinder, and in point of 
fact it is the Stranger who now 
proceeds to "give each answer 



in succession. 

7. 7-t ovv ov] " Suppose you 
say Yes to each alternative in 
turn, and see what follows in 
each several case." 

10. pydevl] Governed by koi- 
vaviaSi 

1 1 . eis firfievl " For any re- 
sult." 

1 4. earai irorepov avrS>v] " Can 
either of them be, without par- 
ticipating in Being 1 " 

17. Ta X v8}i] Compare Theset. 
183 a, where the assertion of 
absolute relativity is similarly 
reduced to nothingness (to 8 y 
cos e'oiKev, e(pavt], el Trdvra Kivelrai. 
irdo-a dnoKpio-is, nepl orov av tis 
aTVOKpivrjrai, Sfiolcos dpdrj eivai, 
ovra r e\eiv (pdvat Ka\ /at) ovrco), 

and ibid. 161 e. 

Trdvra dvdarara yeyovev] 



ol I;. in 
Motion, 

Kest, and 

.•ill other 
bhij] 

muni 

c;il)le witli 

each o1 hter I 

Or shall wo 
bring all 
into com- 
munion 
indiscrimi- 
nately? Or, 
thirdly, 
shall we 
say that 
some have, 
and others 
have not, 
commu- 
nion ? 

If we adopt 
the first 
hypothesis, 
Motion and 
Rest are 
non-exist- 
ent, for 
they have 
no commu- 
nion with 
Beinor 



140 



IIAATQNOS 



Thus havoc 
is made .-it 
once of all 
bhephiloso- 
phieswhich 
attribute 
Being to 
Motion, or 
to Rest, 
« bether as 
One or 
Many. 



And all 
theories 
of compo- 
sition or 
division, 
whether 
into an in- 
finite or a 
fixed num- 
ber of ele- 
mental 
forms, whe- 
ther the 
union and 
partition 
are con- 
ceived as 
alternating 
or as ever 
going on 
together, 
are equally 



avaarara yeyovev, a>? eotKev, apa re tcov to irav p. 252 

KLVOVVTCOV KCLL TCOV to? eV LaTCCVTCOV KOU OCTOL KOLT elSi] 

to. ovtcl Kara raura diaavTcos eypvTa eivai (f)acriv aet' 
irdvTes yap ovtol to ye eivai irpoadirTovaiv, 01 pev 
5 ovtlos KiveiaQai XeyovTes, oi 8e ovtcos eo~TX]K0Ta 
eivai. 

0EAI. KopiSjj pev ovv. 

SE. Kat prjv Kai oaoi tote pev ^vvTiOeaai to. h 
ttccvto, tot€ 8e Siaipovcriv, ehe eis ev kou ifj evo9 
lodireipa e'vre eh irepas eyovTa GTOiyeia hiaipovpevoi 
kou e\ tovtcov crvvTiOevTes, bpoltos pev edv ev pepei 
tovto TiOcoai yiyvopevov, bpoicos 8e Kai eav del, KaTa 
irdvTa Tama Xeyoiev dv ovde'v, ehrep prjdepla ecrTi 
&ppi£is. 
15 0EAI. y O P 0m. 

HE. "Et£ Toivvv dv auTol iravTcov KaTayeXaaTO- 
TaTa peTLOiev tov Xoyov oi prjdev ecovTes Koivcovia 
7ra8rjpaT0$ eWepov OaTepov irpocrayopeveiv. 



" All theories are hopelessly 
unsettled," or " swept away." 
" The ground is cut away 
from all." 

1. apa T€ t5>v\ Qu. an le- 
gend, rd ? 

2. bs ev i(TTavTCiv\ Sc. to 
ttuv. 

Kar ei'617] " In several ab- 
stract forms." 

8. Kai iitjv] This sentence 
refers Avholly to Empedocles 
(cf. ev pepei) and Heraclitus (cf. 
dei), as Heindorf justly ob- 
serves, unless some of the 
earlier Ionians (e. g. Anaxime- 
nes) are included in the words 
f'| ivos cineipa. 

12. Kara navra Tavra] These 
words resume the preceding 



clauses eure — crvvTi.6evTes, opolcos 
— dei. " In all or any of these 
modes their theory is nothing 
worth." 

16. "En toivvv] Cf. Euthyd. 

303 d : Kai rdSe av erepov dijpo- 
tlkov ti Kai ivpqov ev toIs Xdyots" 
onoTav CprjTe prjre KaXov eivai prj- 
8ev prjTe aya86v npdypa prjre k.t.X. 
— t<b ovti ^vppdnreTe to. OTopaTa 

twv dvdpamcov oti he oi povov 

to. tcov ciXXav, d\Xd — Kai rd vpe- 
Tepa avTco k.t.\. 

aiToT] The very men who 
deny predication, with Avhom 
we are now conversing, and on 
Avhose hypothesis the present 
argument is built. 

17. 01 prjdev ea>VTes\ " Who 
forbid us to call anything, be- 



20M2TH2. 



141 



252. 0EAI. n«y; 

c SE. T&> re etVcu irov irepi irdvra a.vayKo£pvTcu 

XPwOaL KCU TU> Xddpis KCU TCp aXXcOV KCU T(p KOtO' 

avTO kcu uvplois {repots, (hv a.Kpare'i? ovre? eipytaOai 
kcu firj avvanrreiv eV toI? Xoyoi? ovk aXXcou deovrai 5 
7W e^eXeytjovTcois, dXXa to Xeyofieuov oiKoOev tov 
iroXejiLov kcu ivavTLCdaouevov e\ovTts, evrbs virofyOey- 
yopLtvov wcnrep tov oltottov Ei)jOi>/cAea, irepKpepovres 
del TTopevovrcu. 



undone, ii 
all combi- 
nation is 
denied. 

But the 
most com- 
plete dis- 
comfiture 
attends the 
enemies of 
predication 
themselves. 
For they 
cannot help 
applying to 
the subject 
of their 



cause partaking of some affec- 
tion from another thing, by 
the name of that other." koiv. 
ira6. (t. = koiv. tov nda^eiv i(p' 
er. Cf. SUpr. 245 a : 7rd#os tov 
ivos i'xfiv. 

(18.) hepov is governed by na- 
BrjiMiTos. Similar language occurs 
in the passage of the Philebus 
already cited, p. 13 a : on 7rpo- 
crayopeveis avra, dvopoia ovto, 
eTepw, cprjaopev, ovopaTi. 

2. T<5 re ehai 7rov] Cf. Theast. 
157 b, 196 e, 202 a. 

3. ciWav] Qu. an legend. 

d'Wrj'Kcov 1 

4. hv aKpciTels ovres etpyeoSai 
kcu pr) o-vvciTTTeiv ev to'is Xdyots'] 

hv is governed by etpyeo-dai, but 
probably also connected by at- 
traction with dicpaTels. avv- 
cmTeiv is used absolutely. " So 
that having no power to re- 
frain from such expressions, or 
to banish connexion from their 
discourse." 

6. dXXd to Xeyopevov] " But 
they always carry about their 
enemy, who haunts them, as 
the saying is, in their own 
house, and like the wondrous 
Eurycles, has a voice within 
them which mocks every syl- 
lable they utter." Compare 



Cratyl. 428 c, where the ac- 
count of self-deception is like 
that of self-contradiction here : 

orav yap prj8e apucpbv dnocrTaTf] 
aXX del 7rapfj 6 i^aTtari-jO'oiv, ttg>s 
ov h)eivov ; Cf. also Gorg. 482 
b : ov croi 6po\oyrjo-fL KoXKiicKtjs, 
&> KaXhiicKeis, dXXd 8iaCpcovrjO-ei ev 
anavTi ra /3i'co. 

8. tov ciTO-nov Eipu/cXea] (See 

Aristoph. Vesp. 10 14.) Eury- 
cles was a ventriloquist pro- 
phet. This passage seems to 
imply that he made his voice 
sound as if from within the 
person consulting him ; and 
this is also suggested by the 
Scholiast's absurd gloss on 

cltottov '. Tov prj edpaiov dXX' 
del €KToni£ovTa Xeyet. The story 

told by the Scholiast, that Eu- 
rycles suffered from having 
given an offensive response to 
some one, is probably a mis- 
taken attempt to explain the 
connexion between a>o-irep — 

Evpv/cXea and ohodev tov iro\e- 

piov. The meaning of course' 
is that they have their enemy 
and their opponent in their 
own breast, in the shape of a 
voice, which comes from within 
them, like the answer of Eury- 
cles, who used to speak in those 



142 



IIAATQN02 



disoourae 
Buob words 

:is " is," 

'• apart," 
" from 
others," 
" by itself," 
and have 
thus an 
adversary 
within, 
who saves 
our labour 
by convict- 
ing them 
of self-con- 
tradiction 
out of 
their own 
mouths. 
But if all 
things are 
allowed to 
have com- 
munion, 
Motion will 
rest and 
Rest will 
move. 
The third 
case alone 
remains : 
that some 
things 
enter into 
combina- 
tion, and 
some do 
not. 



0EAI. Ko/judf) Xe'yei? optoiov re /cat aXrjOes. p. 252 

aJL. TV <5', av rravra dXXijXoi? eu>p.ev Svvapiv 
eyeiv e7riKoivcovla? ; 

0EAI. Tovto pev 0109 re Kuyco SiaXveiv. 
5 HE. U&s; 

0EAI. Ort Kivqais re avrrj iravrairaaLV icttcut 
av /cat araais 1 av iraXiv avrrj klvolto, elrrep e7riyiyvoi~ 
aOr/v eV aXXr/Xoiv. 

EE. 'AAAa p.rjv tovto ye rrov reus peyiarai? 
to avayKais ddvvarov, KLvrjatv re \o~Tau6ai /cat crraaiv 
KLveiaOai. 

0EAI. Xlcos yap ov ; 
aE. To rpirov 8r) povov Xonrov. 
0EAI. Nat. 
15 SE. Kat prjv ev ye tl tovtcov dvayKalov, r) rravra e 
77 pj)bev rj ra p.ev e'OeXeiv, ra. 8e pr) o-vpplyvvaOai. 
0EAI. TIco? yap ov ; 
HE. Kat p,rjv ra ye 8vo ddvvarov evpeOrj. 
0EAI. Nat. 
20 37E. rias* apa 6 /3ovXop.evo? 6p6a>s airoKpivecrOai 
to Xonrov tcov rpicov drjaeL. 
0EAI. KopuSr) pev ovv. 
HE. Ore Sr/ ra pev eOeXei tovto Spav, ra 5' ov, 



who came to him. Cf. Rep. 7, 

52 1 b : otKeto? av Kal evbov 6 
toiovtos 7rdXe/ior avrovs re oXXvai 
Kal tt]v ciW-qv Ttokiv. 

I. ofxoiov re kci\ akrjdis] "Most 

true, your image is a very just 
one." Cf. Rep. 8, 579 d : Uav- 

raivacTiv, e<pr), SfioioTard re Kal 
aXrjdearaTa Ae'yety. 

7. eniyiyvoi<r6riv eV] itnpi- 

yvoladijv eV, YS, Hence Bad- 



ham COnj. e7ripiyvv<r6r]v. But cf. 
Phileb. 37 c: dog?] p.ev hnyiyve- 
a6ov \j/ev8os re Kal dX^des. 

9. reus fiey'iarais avdynais ] 
For the plur., compare Rep. 5, 
458 d: epoiTiKals avayKais; and 
for the whole expression, Tim. 
87 d : ov koXov oXov to £<oov — 
d^vfiperpov yap Tals /xeyicrrrus' 
£vpp,€Tplais. 



20cM2TH2. 



143 



^^Z- crye8bv olov ra ypaptpara TreirovOoT av eh], koll yap 
eKeivcov to. pev dvappoarel irov irpbs dXXrjXa, rd 8e 
^vvappbrrei. 

GEAI. FT^ 8' ov; 

SE. Ta 8e ye (ficovrjevTa 8ia(f)ep6vTu>s row dXXwv 
olov 8ecrp.b? 8id iravrcov KeycoprjKeu, ware dvev Tivbs 
avrcov dSvvarov dp/jLOTTeiv kou tcdv aXXcov erepov 
ere pep. 

GEAI. Kal pdXa ye. 

2?E. Has ovv ol8ev biroia ottoiol? Sward kolvcd- 
veiv, 77 Teyvrjs 8ei tcd p.eXXovTi 8pdv iKavco? avra ; 

GEAI. Te X v V ?. 

SE. Ylolas ; 

GEAI. T77? ypap/iaTiKr}?. 

dE?E. Tt 8e ; wepl tovs tcov ofjecov /ecu fiapeoov 
b (fyObyyovs dp ov X ovrcos ; 6 p.ev tovs avyKepavvv- 



. I ust a of 
1 1,. I 

of the al- 
phabet 
some can 
and others 
cannot be 
combined, 

5 and the 
same is 
true of mu- 
sical notes. 
It is also 
to he ob- 
served, 
that the 
vowels are 
distin- 
guished by 
the power 
which they 
have of 
entering 
into every 
combina- 
tion, and 
being 

jc indispen- 
sable to all. 
And as 
none but 



I. o-yeSov olov ra ypdupara] 

The example of letters is 
used to symbolize the nature 
of the ideas, as in Thea?t. 202 e 
(where it is shewn that the 
simple is known before the 
complex). Polit. 277, 278 (il- 
lustration of the argument 
from example). Rep. 3, 402 
(education in uovo-ikti). Phileb. 
18 (science determining the 
infinite). In the Theastetus 
and Philebus the parallel il- 
lustration from musical notes 
is also adduced, as here. 

5. Ta fie' ye (pwvrjevra olov 

8eo-fi6s] In this the vowels 
symbolize the highest ideas, or 
categories, Being, Identity, and 
Difference. Compare Theset. 
197 d : in the image of the 
aviary, evias fie uovas 8ia ttoktcov 
07177 av tvx^o-l neroaevas — where 



the same thing is intimated, 
and equally without explana- 
tion. 

7. apuorreiv] Neuter verb. 

10. lias ovv oldev] Compare 
Crat. 388 d : nas fie reKTcov rj 6 
ttjv re^vrjv eya>p ; 

11. 8pav Ikovcos aira] This 

expression has no distinct an- 
tecedent. But cf. Theast. 207 
d (in a similar connexion), 
dpcovras avrd, and note. The 
conjectural emendation, 6po>, 
is therefore not absolutely re- 
quired ; though, if such were 
the true reading, it may easily 
have been corrupted froni 8pav 
supr. 252 e. 

10. 6 — rexvrjv e'xcov yiyvao~Keiv\ 
" Who has the art of discern- 
ing." For the inf., cf. Thea?t. 
169 a : <ov 8?) av TTtpt ah lav 
eveiy 8ia(ptpa.v. 



144 



nAATONOS 



tli* 14 r.i 111- 

liianau can 
t.ll which 
letters, and 
none but 
the musi- 
cian which 
notes, may 
or may not 
be com- 
bined, so 
none but 
the dialec- 
tician can 
tell what 
combina- 
tions of 
ideas are 
possible. 



fievovs re Kai ixi] TtyyY)v eywv yiyvcoaKeiv povaiKO?, p« 253 
6 8e /lit) tjvvtii? d/xovaos ; 

0EAI. Ovtcos. 

SE. Rat Kara tcou aXXcou 87] reyycov koli are- 
S^yiwv ToiavTa evpi]aop.ev erepa. 

GEAL n^y <5' ov; 

HE. TV <5' ; e7rei8r) kou to, yevr) 7rpo? dXXrjXa 
Kara ravrd fxlijecos eyeiv w/uoAoy?)/ca/xe^, dp ov peer 
emaTiyxrjs rivhs avayKaiov 8id rwv Xoyu>v iropev- 
10 ea6aL rov 6p9w9 pteXXovra 8ei^etv iroia iroiois avpL- 
(ficovel twv yevcov kou iroia aXXi]Xa ov Several ; kou 
8r) KOU SlOC TTOLVTWV €L awl^OVTa TGLVT earii;, atari, c 
o-v/xpLiyvvcrOai 8vvard elvai ; kou ttolXlv ev tolls 8iou- 
pecreaiu, el 81 oXcov erepa tyjs Sicupeaecos alria ; 
15 0EAI. Tla>? yap ovk eiricrTy]pa]S 8el, kou a^e86v 
ye 'lacos rrjs pteylar^s ; 



4. rexv&v Kai dre)(via>v] "Arts 
and defects of art" — which can 
only be determined by refer- 
ence to the standard of the 
corresponding arts. 

For the mode of expression, 
which arises from Plato's love 
of complete statement, Hein- 
dorf well compares Legg. 2, 

653 e : ovk e'xav aiadrjo-iv rS>v 
iv rais Kivi)afai rd^aov oi8e dra- 
£i<bv, ois 8r] pv6p.6s ovo/ta kcu 
apfiovia. Cf. also infr. 262 c : 
irpdfyv ovK airpa^Lav. 

7. to. yevrj] The word yivos 
is used instead of eldos in se- 
veral places of these dialogues, 
and also in the Parmenides, 
Philebus, Timseus, and Laws. 
This is one of several points in 
which there appears a transi- 
tion in these dialogues towards 
the language of Aristotle. See 



esp. Parm. 135 b : cos ttrri yevos 
ti eKcio~TOV Kai ovoia airrj Ka6' av- 
ttjv. Phileb. 1 2 e : yeWi p.Lv ecrn 
trav eu, ra 8e peprj /c.r.X. It will 
be observed that the word oc- 
curs here at the opening of an 
especially Platonic passage. 

8. fi/^ewy] Gen. of respect. 
Cf. Pep. 5, 456 d : trios e'x«s 

86£r]s rov roiovhe nepi. Alib. 

1 1. Kai 8r) — ehai] " And also 

whether there are any kinds 
which (like the vowels), being 
all-pervading, bind together 
these and make them capable 
of intermixture." 

1 2. ravra] Viz. ret ervpepcovovvra 
rcov yevcov. 

14. el 81 6\av — atria] Antici- 
pating the darepov cpvats which 
is presently discovered, 81a irdv- 
rcov biek-qkvBv'iav, p. 255. 



2CXM2TH2. 



I 1,0 



253. S(E. Tlv ovu av vvv irpoatpovpLev, d> QealrrjTe, 
Tavrr/v ; rj Trpbs Aib? eXa.dop.eu eis ttjv tcou eXev- 
Oepcou epjreaovTeg e7r lo-rrjpyv, kcu KiuSvuevopeu ^77- 
rovvres top o~o§io~Tr\v irporepov dvevpr)Kevai tov 
(f)i\6o-o(Pov ; 

0EAI. Um XeyeLs ; 
d £?E. To Kara yevrj SiaipelaOai koll fxr/re tclvtov 
elSo? erepov -qyrjaaadai pLrjre erepov ov ravrbv p.cov 
ov Trj9 8ia\€KTiKrj? (f)rjcrop.ev 67ricrTr)p.r}? eivai ; 

0EAI. Nat, (jyrjaopLev. 

EE. Ovkovv o ye tovto Svvarb? $pav piav \heav 
hia 7roXXa>v, eVoy eKacrrov Keipte'vov x a> p' L9 i ^olvtt] 81a- 
TerapLevrjv LKavcos SLaiaddverai, kou ttoXXols erepas 
aXXrjXcav virb puag e^oadev irepie)(op,evas, kcu p-iav av 
Sl oXcov iroXXwv ev ev\ tjvvr]p.p.evr]v, kou noXXas 



In search- 
ing foT the 
Sophi 

have found 
tlie philo- 
sopher, the 
" Freeman 
w\ 1 the 

5 truth 
makes 
free." For 
dialectic 
is hie pro- 
vince, that 
is, the art 
by which 
one form is 
seen per- 

10 vading a 
scattered 
multitude, 
and many 
distinct 
forms as 
contained 
in one, and 
again, one 

j r form com- 
bined from 



2. Ttjv tSiv iXevdepcov] Al- 
though the Stranger was not 
present at the conversation of 
yesterday, he is made to allude 
to the description of the philo- 
sophic life which Socrates had 
then given. Theset. 172, sqq. 
Such a failure of the dramatic 
element could have no place 
in the Charmides, Protagoras, 
or Phsedrus, and is rather in 
the manner of the Laws. 

7. prjre ravrov eidos erepov — 

ravrov] This closely corresponds 
with the account of dialectic in 
the Phsedrus, 265 d, e. 

1 1. Ovkovv — eV i'<rraa-&u] "Then 
surely he who can do this is 
able clearly to perceive one 
form pervading many indivi- 
duals which lie apart, and many 
forms distinct from one an- 
other, comprehended from with- 
out by one, and again, one form 



pervading many such wholes, 
and knit together in a single 
unity, and many entirely sun- 
dered and apart. And this is 
to have the science of discern- 
ing in each kind wherein things 
admit of communion, and 
wherein they do not." 

piav I8eav dia 7roAX<Mj>] Com- 
pare Phileb. 16 d, e ; Legg. 

12, 965 C: ap ovu aKpi^earepa 
crKe\|n? 6ea r av rvep\ brovovv 6ra>- 
ovv yiyvoiro rj rb 7rpbs piav Ideav 
i< ra>v iroKK&v kiu dvopoia>v 8wa- 
rbv elvai (Shftveiv. 

12. evbs eKaarov Keipevov X^P'r] 
Cf. Tim. 83 c : koX to fiev koivov 
bvofia wacri tovtois rj Tives rav 
larpatv ttov -)(okov encavopaaav rj 
Kai tis &V hwarbs els tvoWcl pev 
Ka\ dvopoia PXe'neiv, opav §' ev 
avrols ev yevos evbv d£iov eircovv- 
plas ndo-i. Phajdr. 265. 

15. 81 oXav 7roXXwv] These 



146 nAATQNOS 

manyBuoh vcoph iravrr) hicopurpevas. tovto (V eaTiv, fj 7*6 p. 25I 

'■ ll „ „ ' fc, V r, / 5J / V Q 

forms, and Koivcovetv eKaara bvvarai /cat oirr) firj, 6La.Kpi.vuv koto. 
several , , , 

universal*, yevos eiritrTatroai. 

b ^ the C\T? A T TT ' * ? 

boundaries olhAl. ilavTcaracri pev ovv. 

of defini- __, > a \ \ v n ' ^ \ N ' "\ \ 

tion wholly 5 ArL.. AAAa p.i]v to ye otaAeKTiKov ovk aAAco 

sundered ->/ < > ? n^ ~ /1 ~ v £ ' 

from all ococrei?, co? eycppou, irA-qv tco Kavaptos re kou oiKaito? 

This is the (j)lAo(TO(pOVVTL. 

of the com- 0EAI. IleGc* yap av aAAco 8olr) tls ; 

munion and 
incommu- 

nicableness 
of kinds. 
In this 
sphere the 
philoso- 
pher is to 
be sought 



HE. Tov pev 8rj (pLA6cro(j)ov iv tolovtco tlvl tottco 



10 kcu vvv kcu eireura avevpr/crop.ev, eav QjTcopev, Ibelv 
p.ev yaAeirov evapyco? kcu tovtov, erepov prjv rpoirov ]}• 254. 
r\ re tov crocpicrTov ^aAeiroTrj? i] Te tovtov. 
BEAI. Ucd?; 

shalTcome *^' '^ ^^ O-TroSLBpaCTKCOV eh TT]V TOV p.7) OVTOS 

hCTKOTeivoTrjTa, Tptfifj TrpoaamTopLevos avrr/?, Sea to 
CTKOTeivbv tov tottov KctTavorjcrou ^aAeTroy. rj yap ; 



and, like 
tkeSophist 
he is not 
easily dis- 



wholes are the ideas just men- some doubt is implied in the 
tioned, each of which extends words iav (■qrayp.iv. Cf. infr. b : 
to many individuals. Many av en fiovXopivois rjulv fj. From 
particulars are comprised in which it may perhaps be in- 
one universal, and many such ferred that Plato deliberately 
universals again unite in one. relinquished the task of writ- 

(15.) iv ei/1] Sc. oka, or, abso- ing the Philosophus dialogue, 

lutely, "in one." Cf. The?et. n. hepov prjv rponov] Sce'crfi* 

I 57 a : 67r ' ivos, Legg- 4, 7 T 8 C : or yiyverai. 

iv iv\ 7repiKaj36vTa oiov tivi Tima. ig. Tpi&fj~j rpiQrj ("knack," 

6. Ka0apS)s] I.e. Without ad- "rule of thumb,") is several 

mixture of unphilosophic ele- times opposed even more 

ments; "one who has risen into strongly than ipireip'ia to 

the region of pure thought." knowledge and art, and is 

diKaias, i.e. neither dva£lo>s (Rep. pointedly applied in the Pha;- 

5, 495) uor Trapav6pu>s (lb. 7, drus and Gorgias to the so- 

538,9). For KaBapms, cf. Phaedo phistical rhetoric. Phasdr. 260 

65 e, 67 a, b, 69 b. And for e : ovk eari Ttyyr), dXX' are- 

ScKaias, cf. Phsedo 83 a: ol 81- x vos rpifiv- lb. 270 b. Gorg. 

Kaicos (piXopadets. 463 b : ovk eort rexvi}, aW ip- 

IO. Ka\ eTreiTa] Viz. In the neipia Kai Tpifii]. See also Phi- 

" Philosopher," about the pro- lebus 55 e : ras ala6r)creis mra- 

duction of which, however, peXerav ipneipla Kai tivi rpi[3jj, 






2CXM2TH2. 



147 



254- 6EAI. "Eoikcv. 

SE. 'O 8e ye (piAoaocPos, rfj rov ovtos aei Sia 

Xoyta/icov irpoaKeLjxevo^ Idea, 8ta to Xapurpov av tyjs 

\(opa9 ovSapLQ)? ev7rerrj? 6(j)0r}vcu' roc yap ttjs tcdis 

h ttoXXwv yjrv)(rjs ofifxara Kaprepelv irpos to Oelov d(f)o- , 

pcofTa abvvara. 

0EAI. Kal ravra el/co? ov\ yyrrov eKeivcov ovtoos 

€ X €IP. 

SE. Ovkovv irep\ p.ev toutov Kal raya e7n<XKe\^o- 
fieda aafpearepoif, au en fiovXop.evois tj[uv if ire pi he 
rod aocpiarov irov SrjXov a>? ovk avereov, irpiv av 
iKavais avrov OeaawfieOa. 



rats tt]s <TTO)(a(TTU<ijs Trpoo-xpco- 
fiivovs 8vi>d(ie<riv (which are 
here opposed to the essential 
elements of art). The word 
probably retains in this place 
something of the original sen- 
suous meaning : the Sophist, 
from frequent contact, knows 
how to feel his way in the 
dark cave in which he lurks. 
And perhaps it is further 
hinted that he is the true ma- 
terialist who gropes by the 
touch (rpt/3^ TTpoo-arrTopevos), 
and is blind to the light of 
heaven. 

2. bid Xoyiu/xcoi'] "Through 
reasoning." Opposed to rpi^fj. 
Cf. supr. 248 a. 

3. rrpoo-Keipevos] " Clinging 

to." Cf. Kep. 6, 490 b : dXX' 

ioi Kal ovk arret pfiXwoiTo ovb drro- 
Xrjyoi tov epcoTOi k.t.X. lb. 511b: 
iva ptXP 1 T °v avvTToderov irii ttjv 
tov rravrbs dpxrjv Icov, a\j/dpevos 
aiiTrjs, TrdXiv av e^opevos roc ikei- 
vrjs ixoptvav k.t.X. 

4. rd yap rrjs tCov 7roXXa>i'] 

The image of the cave in the 
Republic will occur to every 



reader. Cf. esp. Eep. 7, 518: 

biTTal Kal and birrcov yiyvovrai 
iniTapd^eis (*? iiriyiyv. rap. ]) dp.- 
fido-iv k.t.X. See also the re- 
markable passage in the Laws, 

IO, 897 dt prj roivvv e'£ ivavrias 
oiov els rjXiov dnofikirrovTes, vvara 
eV pear]p.(3piq. enayouevot, Troirjaco- 
p.e8a ttjv aTTOKpio-iv, cos vovv ttots 
8vt}to1s dppacriv d^f6p.evoi re Kal 
yvcocrdp.evoi Ikovcos k.t.X. Com- 
pare with the whole passage 
Bacon, Advancement of Learn- 
ing (Ellis and Spedding's edi- 
tion), vol. iii. p. 286 : " Were it 
not better for a man in a fair 
room to set up one great light, 
or branching candlestick of 
bights, than to go about with a 
small watch candle into every 
corner ?" 

9. Kal rdx] For Taxa = mox, 

"presently," cf. Phil. 53c: Ta^a 

S' — paXXov padr)0-6p.e8a TtpoiXBdv- 

tos rov Xdyov : alib. The sub- 
ject has been already proposed 
by Socrates, and will be ex- 
amined presently, as soon as 
the Sophist and Statesman shall 
have been defined. 



cerned: bat 
for adifli r- 

ent reason. 
The So- 
phist lurka 
amidst the 
darkness of 
Not- Being, 
nf which he 
knows the 
trick. The 
philoso- 
pher clings 
by the force 
of reason to 
the Form 
of Being, 
which is 
dark only 
with the 
excess of 
light, and 
because of 
the weak- 



U 2 



148 



nAATONOS 



11 CSS (if 

mortal 
vision. 
Bui for fche 
presenl we 

IIIUSI |MT- 

severe in 
our effort 
to find the 
Sophist. 

II. c. 

Since we 
are agreed 
that some 
kinds ad- 
mit of com- 
bination 
and some i 
do not, and 
this in 
various de- 
grees, while 



0EAI. KaAw9 etVey. p. 254 

HE. "Or ovv 8r/ ra. ptv rjfxiv rwv yevcov eo/uoAo- 

yyjrat KOivuiveiv edeXeii' dWrjAot.?, ra 8e fxrj, kou ra 

I±<lV Itt oAiyov, ra 8' iiri 7roAAa, ra 8e kou 8ia c 

hiravTOdv ov8eu KcoXveiu rols iraai K€Koivo)vr)Kevai, rb 

8)] perd rovro j-yveiricnrwiieOa tw Aoyw Tfj8e ctko- 

7TOVl>T€S, fXT) 7T€pl TTOLVTCtiV TU)V e\8wV , "iVOL fir) TOLpOLT- 

rojpeda eV 7roA\oi?, aAAa rrpoeXopevoi tcov peyiartov 

Xeyopevcov arret, irpcorov ptev iroia €Kaard iarLv t 

o€7T€£Ta KOivtovias dWrjXcov irccs e^ei 8vvap.eco$, tva 



2. "Or ovv a>jioK6yr]Tai\ Join 

copoXoyrjraL rjpiv. 

3. Kal to. pev — KeKoivcovrjKevai] 

This was not distinctly said, 
but was partly implied in what 
was said of the vowels, supra, 
253 a. 

4. eV oXiyop] " To a small 
extent." 

£7tI 7J-0AX0] "Extending com- 
munication to many things." 

6. £ui/e7rtcr7rco/xe(9a ra Xoya)] 

The ideas of Being, rest and 
motion, which are now chosen 
for examination, have been 
suggested by the preceding 
argument. 

7. firj 7T€p\ TTO.VTCOV TCOV flSojJ/] 

Cf. Spinoz. Eth. II. 1 : Transeo 
jam ad explicanda quae ex Dei 
sive entis seterni et infiniti 
essentia necessario debuerunt 
sequi : non quidem omnia (in- 
fiuita enim infinitis modis ex 
ipsa debere sequi &c). 

tva pfj Taparrcopeda iv 7roX- 

Xot?] A similar reason is ad- 
duced for the use of the argu- 
ment from Example in Polit. 

278c: fj ^rvxr] tcl pev avrcov 

afiff ye nrj tcov ovyKpdcrecov opdebs 
8o£d£ei, peruridepeva be els tcis 



tcov npayparcov paxpas Kai pfj 
pa8ias avWafias ravra ravra nd- 
Xiv dyvoel. The contrast in 
the text, however, is not be- 
tween the simplicity of ideas 
and the complexity of facts, 
but between the few great 
ideas and the multiplicity of 
lesser ones. 

8. Trpoe\6pevot\ Cf. Parm. 

I43 C : iav irpoe\cbpe6a avrcov 
e'ire ftovXei rrjv oicrlav Kal to ere- 
pov e'ire ttjv ovcrlav Kal to ev e'ire 
to ev Kal to erepov. Phileb. 45 e, 
52 e. 

10. dwdpecos] Gen. of respect, 
like pi^ecos supra. " How they 
stand in respect of capacity of 
intercommunion." 

tva to re ov d7raAAaTTeii>] 

"That, even if we cannot grasp 
with perfect clearness the no- 
tions of Being and Not-Being, 
we may at least exhaust the 
argument respecting them, in 
so far as the method of the 
present inquiry permits, and 
try if in any way we can 
force the point that Not-Being 
is really Not-Being, and take 
no harm." 



2CXM2TH2;. 



149 



254- T0 T€ bv kcu fir) ov el urj wdarj aacjjrjvela. 8vvdp.eOa 
Xafitiv, dXX' ovv Xoyov ye evdeel? p.T]oev yiyvco\xeda 
irepi clvtcov, Ka6' ocrov 6 rpoiros evSe^erai ttjs vvv 
d aKetyeco?, edv dpa tjulv ny irapeiKaOr) to ay ov 
Key ova lv cos eariv ovtcos /x>) ov d6 cools dirciX- 
Xdrreiv. 

0EAI. Ovkovv XPV- 

HE. Meyiara urjv twv yevcov, a vvv 8r] difjuev, 
to re ov ai)TO kcu aTacrLs kcu KLvrjais. 

0EAI. UoXv ye. 

aE. Kal ut]v tco ye Svco (pauev avTolv d/juKTco 
Trpos dXXrjXco. 

0EAI. 2<p68pa ye. 

57E. To 8e ye ov /juktov du(f)oiv ecrTov yap 

aU(pCO 7TOV. 

0EAI. Um 8' ov; 

HE. Tpla 8rj ylyveTcu raura. 
0EAI. Tlu^jv; 

HE. Ovkovv clvtcov eKOtcrTOV toIv ptev 8volv erepov 
ecrTiv, clvto 6° eavTco tolvtov. 
e 0EAI. Ovrm. 



IO ( 



it may 
be that 
Borne enter 
universally 
into com- 
munion 
with all, let 
us examino 
the nature 
of a few 
selected 
kinds, espe- 
cially with 
regard to 
their power 
of inter- 
commu- 
nion. 

So we may 
at least ex- 
haust the 
argument 
about 
Being and 
Not-Being, 
and per- 
haps find 

j - out a way 
in which 
Not-Being 
may be 
safely de- 
clared to be 
Not-Being. 
Being, 
Best, and 
Motion are 

20 the highest 
kinds. Of 
these, Rest 
and Motion 
are mutu- 



2. 'Xafte'iv] " To grasp," — as 

in Xafielv nap' ipavra, irapa aav- 
tg>, &C. 

3. ko.6' ocrov — aiifyews] Thus 
even in the more exact of his 
dialogues Plato ever complains 
of an imperfect method. Cf. 
Eep. 435 d, 506 e, 533 a, Phsedo 
85 c, Tim. 29 b. 

4. irapeiKadi]] Bodl. napei- 
KaaOj). 

8. a vvv S?) Sijj/iev] The ante- 
cedent is found in the following 
words. " The most important 
kinds are those which we have 



just been considering." 

14. dpcpolv] Dative. " Being 
has admixture with both." Cf. 
^^SS- 5> 733 d • rt,/ey °v v *<" 

iTocroi fieri f3iot, Z>v nepi Set 7rpo- 
eXopevov — Ibovra — ff/v u>s oiov 
T ecrriv avdpeoTTOV paKapia>Tara j 

Parm. 129 e : ra ei8?j, olov 
6poLOTT]Ta re Kal dvopoiorrjTa Kal 
TrXijdos Kal to ev, Kal errdenv Kal 
Kivrjcriv. 

19. Ovkovv — tovtov^ Compare 
the very similar manipulation 
of ideas in Theeet. p. 185. 



150 



TIAATONOI 



ally incom- 
municable, 
whileBeing 
communi- 
cates with 
them both. 
Thus there 
come to be 
three. And 
each is the 
same with 
itself, but 
other than 
the remain- 
ing two. 
We have 
thus men- 
tioned two 
more kinds, 
unless 
Same or 
Other can 
be identi- 
fied with 
Being, or 
Motion, or 
Rest. 
But Same 
and Other 
are predi- 
cable both 
of Rest and 



SE. Tl 7TOT aV VVV OVTCD? €Lp7)Ka/l€V TO T€ TUVTOl> p. %tfa 

kgu 6a.T€pov ; iroTepa 8vo yevrj tlvI aVTGO, TCOV jllv 
rpiwv aAAco, ^vfifxiyvvpevoi prjv iicelvois e£ dudyKT)? 
dei, kcu irep\ irtvTe a A A' ov 7repl rpicov coy ovrcov 
5 avTcau (TKe7rT€oi>, 7) to re tuvtov tovto koll Odrepov 
coy (iKtivcov tl irpocrayopevovTes \av6dvop.ev rjfJLas p. 25^ 
avTOv? ; 

0EAI. "Ia-co?. 

SE. 'AAA' ov tl fiyv KLvrjcri? ye K<xi aTacris ov6' 
10 eTepov ovt€ tclvtov icrTi. 

0EAI. Flcoy; 

SE. 'O tl irep av kolvyj 7rpoo-eL7rcofiei/ Kivr)o~LV kcu 
o-tolctlV) tovto ovdeTepov avroZv olov re dvaL. 

0EAI. T*&j; 
15 HE. Y^ivijais re crr?;crerai koll o-Tacri? av KLvrjOr}- 
crtTaL. 7repl yap dpL(poTepa OaTepou cmoTepovovv 



1 . Ti 7tot av — Bdrepov] Com- 
pare the emergence of the ideas 
of acpobpa, rjpepa and rroaov, and 
their relation to each other, 
occasioned by the simple words 
Ka\ acpodpa ye, in Phileb. 24 c. 

2. Tvorepa — air co] Sc. \eKTecv. 

avro), unemphatic, resuming 

ravTov and Bdrepov. 

4. Ka\ nep\ TreVre] Cf. supr. 
243 e : Ka\ Tpla to TTav aXka firj 
8vo K.T.X. 

as ovrav] For the posi- 
tion of cos, cf. ravrbv cos ovra 
a few lines below, and iraialv cos 
ovo-iv rj/juv supr. 242 d. 

5. rj to re tuvtov] " Or in 

saying Same and Other, are we 
unconsciously speaking as of 
one of those former ideas?" 

1 6. irepl yap — spclvtiov] Heind. 
" Nam alter utrum eorum utrum- 
vis (sive motus sive status) 



quando in utroque inerit (in 
motu vel statu) alteram coget 
in contrariam rursus suae na- 
turam abire, quoniam hoc alte- 
rum contrarii particeps factum 
est." This is right, and has been 
wrongly criticised by Badham, 
who does not appear to see 
that the second ddrepov must 
be correlative to the first. But 
Heind. and Stallb. do not seem 
to have observed that the case 
is still general, and is only ap- 
plied to TavTbv and Odrepov in 
the next sentence. The argu- 
ment is this : — Best and mo- 
tion cannot be identified either 
with Same or Other. For if 
either rest or motion were 
identified with anything which 
is predicable of both, motion 
would rest and rest Avould 
move : inasmuch as that (whe- 



2CHM2TH2. 



1.01 



255' yiyvop^evov avTolv dvayKaaet /xeTa(3a\\etv av Odrepov 
b em tovvuvtlov Trjs clvtov (pvorecos, are jieTaaypv tov 
evavTiov. 

GEAI. Kofiidfi ye. 

HE. MeTe'^erov fiyv d/i(j)co tovtov /cat Oarepov. 5 

GEAI. Na/. 

HE. Mr) tolwv Xeycoptev Kivqaiv y elvai ravrov 
7] Oarepov, firjS' av (ndcriv. 

GEAI. Mt) ydp. 

HE. 'AAA' dpa to ov teal to tovtov go? ev tl 10 
oiavoryreov r)fuv ; 

GEAI. "laws. 

HE. 'AAA' el TO OV KOLL TO TOVTOV fxqbev Sid(f)opov 
arjfiaiveTov, klvyjctlv av iraXiv /cat o~Tao~iv d/KpoTepa 



Motion, 
and hence 

identifii d 
with either. 
For being 
identified 

with one 
and then 
predicated 

of the 
other, 
either of 
them, as 
the case 
might be, 
would 
cause Mo- 
tion to be 
predicated 
of Rest, or 
Rest of 
Motion. 
And Being 
and Same- 
ness are 
not one : 



eivai XeyovTes a/x0orepa ovtcos amd Tamov d>s ovTa 15 f ke *? *?J' 
c 7rpoo-epov/j.ev. 

GEAI. 'AAAa firjv tovto ye ddvvaTov. 

HE. ' ASvvaTOv dpa TavTov /cat to ov ev elvai. 

GEAI. ^yeoov. 

,_ ,_, m , o,\ \ ~ v ,,* 9^ Sameness, 

A'E. TeTapTOV Or) TTpOS TOW TpiCTlV eioecnv etOOff 20 therefore, 

y , x is a fourth 

to TavTov TLUcofxev ; 



and Rest 
both are, 
we should 
imply that 
they are 
both the 



ther rest or motion) which was 
so identified with the common 
predicable, becoming thus pre- 
dicate of both, will cause the 
other (whether motion or rest) 
to be changed, as thus parti- 
cipating (by the force of predi- 
cation) in the opposite nature. 
But sameness and difference 
are predicable both of motion 
and rest. Therefore neither mo- 
tion nor rest can be identified 
either with sameness or differ- 



ence. 
7- 



Mj) toivvv] " Let us not 



therefore identify Same or 
Other with motion, nor yet 
with rest." Cf. Pha?do 103, 4. 

13. 'AAV el — Trpoaepovfiei'] 

" But if the words Being and 
Sameness have no difference of 
meaning, then again in saying 
that motion and rest both are 
we shall speak of them as being 
both the same" 

20. e'Sos] Omitted in Bodl. 
A. n., but probably genuine. 
The Same is not only separate 
from the remaining kinds, but 
is itself to be recognized as a 



kind, dis- 
tinct from 
the other 
three. 



1 52 



IIAATQNOS 



Nor can 
( (thernesa 
be identi- 
fied willi 
Being : else 

tln'ivwmilil 
be an abso- 
lute Other- 
ness, as 
there is an 
absolute 
Being. But 
the Other 
is always 
relative to 
an Other. 

And so 
the Other 
is to be 
recognized 
as a fifth 
kind. And 
it is at the 
same time 
perceived 
to extend 
to all the 
kinds. For 
each of 
them has 
now been 
distin- 
guished 
from the 



0EAI. n avv /xev ovv. p. 2jj 

AE. TV Se ; to Ourepov apa rjpuv XeKTeov we'/A- 

7TT0V ; 1] TOVTO KOLL TO OV 6i<S hv OCTTU OVO/JLUTU e(j) 

ein yevei 8iavoeia0ai Sel ; 
s 6EAI. Tax «*• 

aE. AAA' oifiai ae avyyoopelv tow ovtcov d 
tcl p.ev avTa kglO' avTa, to. 8e irpos aXXrjXa de\ 
XeyeaOai. 

6EAI. T/ 8 ov ; 
to SrE. To <$' ercpop del npbs eTepov. rj yap ; 
0EAI. Ovtcos. 

aE. Ovk av, el ye to ov /cat to darepov /xrj 7rd/x- 
7roXv 8ie(f)epeTr)v' dXX* e'hrep Oarepov dp.(f)oiv \xeTelye 
toIv eiSolv uicnrep to ov, tjv av 7tot€ tl /cat tcov 
i$€Tepcov eTepov ov irpos eTepov. vvv 8e dreyyas r)puv 
o tl irep av eTepov y, av/jLfie'firjKev efj dvdyKrjs eTepov 
tovto o irep ecrTiv eivai. 



distinct kind or foiTn. iva.pi6y.ov 

tcov noWcov ovtcov ei8os ev (infr. 

258 c). The Bodleian MS. 
errs more often by omission 
than by insertion. The dis- 
tinction between Being and 
Sameness is hardly maintained 
in what follows. 

6. 'AXX' olfiai rj yap ;] " Of 

existences, some are absolute, 
some correlative: other is al- 
ways relative to other." Here 
absolute and relative are dis- 
tinct ei'Sq, but are only alluded 
to in passing. (Cf. Phileb. 
51c: ravra yap ovk rival irpos Tl 
KaXa — ciXX' del KaXa. icaff avrd.) 
12. Ovk av eivai] "That 

could not be if Being and Other 
were not widely different. If 



Other had partaken of both 
kinds (absolute and relative), 
as Being does, there would have 
been a time when some one of 
the class of Other things were 
Other otherwise than in rela- 
tion to Other. But in reality 
we find that whatever is Other 
must of necessity be what it is 
in relation to an Other." For 
the gen. hepov, cf. Rep. 4, 438 e: 

oo~a iariv oia eivai tov, and 439 
a '. 011 tovtcov Brjcrei tcov tivos 

eivai onep eo-Tiv. It is not ob- 
served that TavTbv is also a 
relative term (irpos n). But 
a thing may be TaiiTov in rela- 
tion to itself, and so not rrp6<; 
eTepov or 7rpor aWrjha. Cf. 

Thea3t. 185 b. 



2CXM2TH2. 



153 



15$. 0EAI. Aeyets KaOdirep e'xei. 

SE. Heinrrov 8rj tyjv Oarepov (fivcriv XeKreov ev 
e tqLs e'lSeaw ovaais, ev ols 7rpoaipov/uLe0a. 

GEAI. Nat. 

EE. Kai Sia iravTcov ye avTTjv avrcou (f)/]o~o/j.ev , 
elvai $Le\r)\v6vLav ev ekaarov yap erepov elvai tcov 
aXXcov ov did rrjv avrov (pvcriv, dXXd 81a, to pteTeyeiv 
T7j9 I8eas rrjs Oarepov. 

GEAI. Kofjudfj fxev ovv. 

SE, ( 0<5e 8rj Xeycop.ev eirl tcov irevTe Ka9' > ev . 
avaXafifidvovres. 

GEAI. My; 

£7E. TlpcDTOv jxev Kivncriv, coy eari Travrdirao-iv 
erepov o-rdaeoos. r) Iras Xeycop.ev ; 

GEAI. Ovtcos. 

SE. Ov ardai9 dp earlv. 

GEAI. OvSa/im. 
256. JgE. "Ecrrt Be ye did to [xereyeiv tov ovtqs. 

GEAI. "Eotiv. 



3. eV 01? Trpoaipovjj.e6aj Equi- 
valent to a irpoaip. ev is re- 
peated by attraction from the 
previous clause. " Posterius 
in his iv tanquam e precedente 
syllaba, natum expungerem, ni 
obstaret ejusdem modi exem- 
plum apud Xenoph. de Vectig. 

iv. I 3 : 'Air avrwv pev ovv eyaiye, 
d(p' av peXXa Xeyeiv, ovoev ri 
d£ia> 6avpd£ea6ai <aj dvaevperov 
Ti egevprjKas." (Heind.) 

I O. eVt t£>v irevre] These five 
" chief kinds of Being" are 
adopted by Plotinus, who, in 
forming his complex notion 
of the Highest Truth, prefers 
them, in combination with the 
ti-iple ovala of the Philebus, to 



the categories of Aristotle. 
Ennead V, b. 1, VI, b. 2. He 
makes a distinction, which in 
Plato is hardly present, be- 
tween a swrvmum genus and a 
constituent element of absolute 
Being. 

1 1 . dva\ap,^dvovres] " Kesum- 
ing," a technical word in Pla- 
tonic discussion, cf. Theset. 
187 c and note. Perhaps here 
used more literally, " taking 
them up to examine them one 
by one." 

13. Kivrjaiv] Sc. Xeycopev. 

1 6. Ov ardais tip* earlv] Here 
the Other is for the first time 
seen to be identical with Ne- 
gation. 



rest, not li> 
'1 of 

i. but 
through 

participa- 
tion in the 
Form of 
Otherness. 

' Thus, first 
of all, Mo- 
tion is 
Other than 
Rest : i.e. 
is not Rest. 
YetMotion 
is, because 
Motion 
partakes 
of Being. 
Again, 
Motion is 
Other than 
the Same : 
is not the 
Same. Yet 
Motion 
partakes 

c of Same- 
ness, and 
is the same 
Motion. 
We must 
not quarrel 
with this 
result, that 
Motion is 
the Same 
and not the 



154 



nAATONOS 



Same, for 
each ex- 
pression is 
true, but 
in a differ- 
ent respect. 
Motion is 
the same 
w itli itself 
through 
participa- 
tion in the 
Form of 
Sameness, 
not the 
Same, 
through 
partaking 
of the 
Other, 
whereby it 
is separated 
and be- 
comes 
Other than 
the Form 
of the 
Same. 
Indeed, as 
we have 
shewn that 
in the na- 
ture of 
things 
there must 



S*E. AvOis Si) ttolXlv i) k'ivi-i<tls erepov ravrov P- 256. 

IdTlV. 

0EAI. 2 X e^. 
SE. Ov ravrov apa ecrrlv. 
5 GEAI. Ov yap ovv. 

SE. 'AAAa pL7)v avTTj y r)v ravrov Sid to p.ere- 

\€LV at) TTOLVT aVTOV. 

GEAI. Kcu /xaAa. 

HE. Ti)v KLvrjcriv 8rj ravrov r eivai Ka\ fxr) 
o ravrov bp.o\oyr)reov K.a\ ov ftvayepavreov. ov yap 
orav etirtopiev avrrjv ravrov /ecu pr/ ravrov, 6p.ola>? 
eiprjKapiev, aAA' birorav pcev ravrov, did rrjv p.eOe^iv 
ravrov 777)0? iavrtjv ovrco Xeyopev, orav be pj] rav- b 
rov, 81a. rrjv Koivcovlav av Oarepov, oY rjv aTro^copL^o- 
ip.£vr) ravrov yeyovev ovk eicelvo aAA' erepov, coo-re 
opOcos av Xeyerac ttoKlv ov ravrov. 

GEAI. Udvv pcev ovv. 

SE. Ovkovv kolv el tttj p.ereXap.(3avev avrrj klvt]- 



1. Avdis 8tj irdXiv] "Again." 
I. e. To make a new beginning 
from the same point, viz. ki- 
vrjais. 

7. avToii] Sc. rov ravrov. 
Cf. supr. 254 d, to which rjv 
refers. rrdvra is therefore re- 
stricted to being, rest, and 
motion, as 8ia navrcov — avruv, 

p. 255 d, to the five "kinds." 
av marks the opposition be- 
tween the reason now given 
and the words r) iclvr}o~is erepov 
ravrov ecTTiv. 

JO. 0x1 hvo-^epavreov] "We must 
not quarrel with this contra- 
diction ;'' cf. Theset. 155a: ov 
Svo-KoXaivovres. Gorg. 450 e : 
v7roXa/3ot av ris, el (HovXoiro 8vo-- 
Xepaiveiv iv rols Xoyois. 



ov yap — opoicos elprjicauev] 
Cf. Rep. 5, 454 b : eVecrKe^d- 
p.e6a he ovS" onyovv rl ethos to 
rrjs erepas re Ka\ rr/s avrrjs (pv- 
creas Kal irpbs rl relvov <i>pi£6p.eda 
Tore k.t.X. 

13. irpbs eavrTjv ovra> \eyouev\ 

" We call it so (the same) in 
relation to itself." 

orav — ravrov] " But when 
we speak of it as not the Same, 
this is because of the participa- 
tion in the Other, whereby it 
is severed from the Same, and 
has become not that but an 
Other, so that again it is rightly- 
spoken of as not the Same." 

18. avrr) k'lvx]o-is] Here, and 
supr. 252 c!, distinguished from 
the Trddrjp.a Kivi]aeas. It is im- 



20<i>irrH2. 



155 



256. ats (TTaaecos, ovoev av aroirov r\v aTa.cnp.ov ai>Ti)v be a 00m- 

z munion of 

Trpoaayopeveiv ; kinds, wo 

apat T\ a' ' " " ~ should not 

WEAL UpuoTOLTa ye, enrep tcov yevcov avyywpr}- be stagger- 

cropieOa ra pev dXXrjXoi? eOeXetv p.lyvvcr$ai, to. oe p.rj. mgth&t 

r> Ipn IT v v ' ' N ' ' ' ' Motion, 

AJi.. J\ai pLYJV €7TL y€ TT]V TOUTOV TTpOTepOV CLTTO-B quaMo- 

» > * " ~ * J. ' /) » ■\ ' t v \ tion, was 

oei^iv y tcov vvv a(piKopeua, eXey^ovTes coy eorf Kara stationary, 

j / / if there 

puow raurr;. were any 

r>T^ at n « J v . manner of 

BEA1. llwy 7a/) ov ; commu . 
SE. Ae.ycop.ev 8rj irdXiv' 77 klvtjctls Icttlv erepov 



nion be- 
tween M 
tion and 



tov erepov, KaOdirep tglvtov re -qv aXXo kou tyjs 10 ^° n t 
ardaecos" ; 

0EAI. ' ' AvayKctiov. 

£?E. Oi;^ erepov dp eo~Ti ny kou erepov Kara tov 
vvv Srj Xoyov. 

0EAI. 'AX^. 

HE . Tt oi)j> £77 ro /uera tovto ; apa raw juez> 



Once more: 
Motion is 
Other than 
the Other, 
and so 
Other and 
not Other 
at once. 



And as we 
have 1 



TpiQQV €T€pOV GLVTTJV (firjCTOpieV elvat, TOV Se TerdpTOV ken of five 



kinds, 



d p.7] (pcopiev, op.oXoyr/o~avTes avra eivou irevre, irepi cov there re- 

\ > <? ' /1 / /1 « mains a 

kou ev 01? rrpovoepeOa crKorreiv ; fourth to 



plied that motion does not 
partake of rest. Yet there is 
a tendency in this dialogue to 
attribute necessity or perma- 
nence to the idea of motion. 

5. Kaififjv — ravTTj] Supr. 252. 

9. erepov rov erepov^ In this 

argument motion appears in 
one and the same expression 
as other and not other. Cf. 
Theset. 165 h,c, compared with 
the preceding argument ; and 
for a similar refinement on 
erepov, ib. 1 89 c, where, how- 
ever, the contradiction is merely 
verbal, as in Euthyd. 301. 

Having made this step, we 
are prepared to understand 

X 



more easily that motion at 
once is and is not. 

14. 877] To be taken, not 
closely with vvv, but with the 
whole sentence. 

16. apa tcov pev~\ dp' avrcov, 

the reading of the best MSS., 
is probably due to avrrjv just 
below, dp ov, which Bekker 
and the Zurich editors ap- 
prove, is rightly rejected by 
Stallbaum, who reads apa with 
seven MSS. 

18. avra] Sc. to. yevrj. 

19. iv ols] " Within the 
sphere of which." ev, as in 
Theset. 152 c : ev re Beppols 
kuX irdari rols roiovrois. 



156 



nAATONOS 



be distin- 
guished 

I'mm Mo- 
tion, M"- 
tiun is ncit 
Being, but 
partakes of 
Being, and 
so is and is 
not in the 
most abso- 
lute sense. 



Thus there 
is found an 
existence 
of Not- 
Being, oc- 
casioned by 
the nature 
of the 
Other, in 
the case of 
Motion, 
and in that 
of each of 
the kinds, 
Being not 
excepted. 
For Being 



GEAI. Kal 7TW? ; ubvvaTov yap avy\a)pu.v p. 256. jj,; 
eXuTTCo tov dpiOpbv tov vvv 8rj (fjave'vTO?. 

SE. 'A5ewy apa ttjv kivijctiv erepov eivai tov bv- 
T09 Siapca^opevoL Xeycopev ; 
5 GEAI. ' Adeearara pev ovv. 

HE. Ovkovv 81) aa(f)a>9 r\ Kip^cris ovtoo? ovk ov 

e<TTl KCU OP, €7r€L7T€p TOV OVTOS p.€T€)(ei \ 

GEAI. 1a(j)€aTard ye. 

HE. 'Eotm/ apa e£ uvdyKr)? to p.r) bv iiri re 
10 KiV7]cr€co9 eivai Kal KaTa iravTa Ta yevrj. KaTa iravTa 
yap rj OaTepov (pvcri? erepov direpya^opevr] tov ovtos e 
€K.acrTOV ovk ov woieL, Kal fjvprravTa Srj kutcc Tama 
OVTC09 ovk ovTa bpOco? epovpev, Kal iraXtv, otl p.eTeyei 
tov ovtos, eivat re Kal bvTa. 
15 GEAI. KcvSvvevei. 

HE. He pi eKao~TOv apa twv elSav ttoXv pev £o~tl 
to 6v, anreipov 8e irX-qOei to pr] ov. 



2. (fravevTos] " WTiicli shewed 
itself." It is implied that the 
argument has proceeded, as 
usual, without the will of the 
speakers ; i. e. has not been 
developed arbitrarily. 

4. diapaxdpevoi] The notion 
of violence, and of a conflict 
with the Sophist, implied in 

ftuifcadai and 8iapaxr]Teov, 242 d, 

is continued here. 

9. "Ecttiv apa] I. e. What has 
now been said of motion must 
be necessarily true of every- 
thing except the idea of Being. 

Constr. ecrri to pr] of eivai, 

" It is true that that which 
is not, is," " The existence of 
Not-Being is a fact," " not 
only in the case of motion, but 
in every kind. For the nature 



of difference, extending to all, 
divides each thing from Being, 
and makes it not- Being, and 
so in this way we shall be 
right in saying that all things 
whatsoever are not-Being, and 
again because they partake in 
Being that they are and have 
being." 

II. 17 OaTepov (pvo~is~\ For the 
expression, cf. Parm. 156 e : 

aXX' 17 e^ai^i^s avrr) cj>ucns aro- 
ttos tis eyKa6r)Tai pera^ii ri)s kivtj- 
creoos re Kal ardaecos, ev XP° V( ? 
ovdevl ovcra, Ka\ eh ravTTjv 8r) Ka\ 
en TavTrjs to Te Kivoipevov ueTa- 
/3d\Xet en\ to io-rdvai /cat to 
eo-Tos eVi to KivelaSai. 

1*7. aneipov 8e ir\i]8ei to prj 6V] 

The argument is tacitly car- 
ried a step in advance. It 



20<MrrH2. 



157 



0EAI. "EoiKev. is Other 

, v ,\ > \ ^ v r/ than 

aE. Ol>/couV /cat ro 6^ afro raw aAAcov erepov remaining 

, kind, and 

elvai XeKTeOV. is once for 

, all itself, 

0EAI. AvayKy. hut is ,„,/ 

—IT? x? v v * " » ' " r ' ' ' v "\\ timeswith- 

&&. l\ai to ov ap rjp.iv, oaa irep eari ra aAAa, 5 out num. 

\ ~ » v > ~ \ . ,\ ,v \ tier. We 

/cara roaavra ovk eariv. eKeiva yap ovk ov ev jiev must ac- 

> \ v ,/ j\ v > n \ -?x-v » cept these 

avTO earns, arrepavra be rov apiup.ov raAAa ovk apparent 

3/ •? di.screpan- 

€<TTIV av. cies, since 

GEAI. 2x 6 ^^ OVTCOS. Terted the 3 ' 

»4-I2j. Ui>/cow ot; /ecu ravra ov ovayepavreov, eirei- i° n j ono f 

7re/9 e'xti KOtvooviav aAArjAoi? r) raiv yevmv (pvai?. el ^^^ 

8e tls ravra fir] avy^copel, rreiaas rjficov rods e/iwpo- S^wtth 

a6ev Aoyovs ovrco TretOerco ra ftera ravra. ff't^ft 

0EAI. AiKaiorara etprjKa?. that thesis. 

£?E. ,f I8a>[iev dr) real rode. 15 

0EAI. To irolov ; 

SE. 'Q7r6rai> ro fir) ov Aeycop.ev, ws* eoinev, ovk 
evavrlov ri Aeyo/iev rov ovro?, aAA' erepov fiovov. 

0EAI. Um; 



is assumed that the Baripov 
<pv(Tis differentiates each thing- 
riot only from Being in the 
abstract, but from every other 
existing kind except itself : so 
that it is not each in turn. 

5. oaa irep — ovk eariv] Cf. 
Theset. 171a (where Protagoras 
is put to silence) : Baa nXeiovs 
ois fxT] ooKel fj oh ooKel, roaovrco 
fiaXkop ovk 'iariv 77 eariv. 

10. Ka\ Tavra] "We must not 
quarrel with this, any more 
than with the former result." 

Ka\ refers to ov ova\epavTeov in 

p. 256 a. 

12. nelaas — tovs Aoyovs] The 
arguments are half-personi- 
fied. For the sentiment, com- 



pare Gorg. 472 bj and for 
rjp.au tovs ~\6yovs, supr. 239 c: 

dvTikap{3av6p.evos Tjp,a>v dnoarpe- 
i|/-ei tovs \6yovs. 

13. 7rei#eVa>] Sc. rjpas. 

By the same means, by 
which it is shewn that that- 
which-is-not is, the nature of 
that-whick-is-not is made plain. 
ISTot- Being is not the opposite 
of Being, but only other than 
Being. This is now further 
illustrated. According to the 
preceding argument /*?) ov must 
here include the negation of 
Being in the abstract and the 
negation of the several kinds 
of Beino-. 



FIAATONOS 



Not-Being, 
then, or 
negative 
determina- 
tion, is not 
contrary to 
Being, or 
positive 
determina- 
tion, but 
only differ- 
ent in each 
case from a 
particular 
positive 
determina- 
tion. 



aK. Olov otolv e'lTrwpev tl fir) pe'ya, TOTe paXXov p. 257.jp. 
tl aot (j)aLvope6a to apiKpov r] to taov hrfkovv tco 
pi)fiaTL ; 

6EAI. Kal TTcGy; 
5 SE. Ouk ap, IvavTiov mav u7ro(f)aaL9 Xeyrjrcu 
m-jpaiveLv, avy^coprjaopeda, too~ovtov 8e povov, otl 
tlov aXXcov tl pTjvvei to pr) kcu to ov irpoTLOepeva 
tcov eiriovTcov ovopaTtov, paXXov he tcov it pay 'pax cov c 
7repl cltt av K€7]Tat Ta eirL(j)6eyyopeva vaTepov ttjs 
)oa.7ro(f)ao~€Q)S bvofiaTa. 

0EAI. WavTanracri pev ovv. 

SE. T68e 8e 8iai>or)6cop€i>, el kcu cro\ ^vvhoKel. 

0EAI. To 7rolov ; 



2. r<5 pT]nari] " The expres- 
sion." The word is used, with 
exactness = the predicate : not 
ovofian or Xoya. 

5. aTro'^acris] The word oc- 
curs only in the Soph., Cra- 
tylus, and Apology of Plato; 
and in this place signifies not 
the negative proposition, but 
the negative particle. 

7. tu>v aXXaiv tl prjvvei'] 

Compare Kant, Kritik der 
Keinen Vernunft (Leipzig, 
1853) page 101. Indefinite 
Judgments : — " Nun habe ich 
durch den Satz — die Seele 
ist nicht sterblich, zwar der 
logischen form nach wirklich 
bejaht, indem ich die Seele 
in den unbeschrankten Urn- 
fang der nicht Sterblichen 
Wesen setze. Weil nun von 
dem ganzen Umfange rnogli- 
cher Wesen das Sterbliche 
einen Theil enth'alt, das Nicht 
sterbende aber den anderen, 
so ist durch meinen Satz nicht 



anderes gesagt als dass die 
Seele eines von der Unendli- 
chem menge Dinge sei, die 
iibrig bleiben wenn ich das 
Sterbliche insgesammt weg- 
nehme," u. s. w. 

The difficulty of conceiving 
fifj ov as a yevos is parallel to 
that felt in the Philebus about 
the aneipov, p. 26 d : feat tol 
TToWd ye Kal to aneipov nape- 
axeTO yevrj, Spas §' enio-cppayi- 
u6(vTa to> tov paXXov Kal evav- 
t'iov yevei, \v ecpdvr]. 

8. ovopaTav, paXXov 8e tq>v 
7rpaypara>v] The genitives are 
governed by t5>v aXXcov. " The 
prefixes ov and p.rj point to 
something different from the 
words which follow them, or 
rather from the things which 
the words uttered after the 
negative import." 

12. ToSe Se biavot]6u>pev\ "Let 

us, now, cari-y our minds 
through this matter." 



2CMM2TH2. 159 

25J. S*E. 'H Oarepov /jlol (f)vais (Palverai KarciKeKep- 
\iaricr6ai Kadairep eVr larr/pr]. 

GEM. nw. 

£?E. Mia ixev earl irov koll Ikuvt). to <$' liri rep Otherness 

, ' , „ r/ a\ > orDiffer- 

yiyvo\xzvov fiepo? avTrjs €kclo~toi> a(popLcruev eirwvv- 5 encehas 

r 3/ v , « » » / j,\ x \ ^ ' , as many 

d /xiocz/ Kj^ef r^a eavTrjs lOiav olo ttoAAoll re^vai r branches as 

, s , v , „ Knowledge 

eiai Aeyopevai koll €7ricrTi]fiaL. lias: each 

r\r< a t rr ' > 9 of which is 

UJliAl. llOLVV fJL€l> OVV. expressed 

/— <t\ r\ ' \ \ « /l > J' ' ^ j y putting 

A£j. KJVKOVV KOLL TOL T7]S VCLTtpOV (pV(T€CdS /JLOpiOL the word 

fiLas ovar)? TavTOu ireirovOe tovto. 10 fore the 

0EAI. Tax av' aAA' oirrj 8r) Xeycopev ; onToAhe 

3*E. "Ecm r» KaAw rt darepov popiov olvtltl- knowledge. 
$€fxevov ; 

0EAL *Earur. 

HE. Tour' ovv avcovvpLOv epovpev rj riv eypv eirca- 15 
vvpclav ; 

GEAI. 'E^o^* o yap /A17 kolaov eKaarore (f)6ey- 
yo/ji€0a, tovto ovk aXXov twos erepov icrriu r) ttjs 
rod kolXov (pvaeoj?. 

£?E. 'Wi vvv, rode p.01 Ae'ye. 20 

e GEAI. To iroiov ; 

SE. 'AAAo n tgsv ovtcov tivos \evos~\ yevovs Every such 



I. KaTaKeKcpiiaTiadai] For a by Te^vai Kai eTTiaTrjfiai follow- 

similar use of this favourite ing. 

word, cf. Parm. 144 b : (to $v) IO. tovtciv — tovto] eirawpiap 

KaTaKeKep/iaTio-Tai cipa a>s oioVre I8iav €KO.o~tov e^ei <a\ TtoWa io~Ti. 
afxiKpoTaTa (%t is o-fiiKpoTaral^ 1 1. dXX' ottj] 5?) Xeycop-evj] "But 

mil fie'yicTTa Kai 7ravTax£ys ovtcl. shall we determine how?" 

4. to 8' «ri rep yiyvofievoii] The Bodl. has oXAojtj sin. ace. 
Cf. Kep. 6, 511 d, e, for this 22. "AAAo ti — fifj xakov] ivos, 

use of inl with the dative. which Hermann retains on the 

6. eavTJjs] This is omitted authority of the Bodleian MS., 

in one MS. (Par. E.), but is to is omitted thei*e as well as in 

be retained. The gender is An. The reasoning seems to 

n-pos to o-Tjp.aiv6p.evoi>, but helped require that the words should 



1 (>■() 



OAATONQ2 



has a real U(f)Opl(T0ei> KGU irpos Tl TCOV OVTCOV CLV TToklV UVTLTt- p. 2^7 

significance v r , . , 7 v v , 

and de- 0€l> OVTCO ^up/3el3l]K€U dvai TO fXI] KOiXov ; 

notes all Qp . r ^c 

that is dis- OJiAl. KJVTCOS. 

tinguished _, „ x * * I 1 ' 71 ' f * 

from the AEj. KJVT09 Ot) 7T/0O? OV |_??J UVTlUeCTlS, CO? €CU/C , 

object in 9 , , , - , v , 

question. 5 tlVCU JTLJ avpjdaiVeL TO /JL7] KGCAOV. 

0EAI. 'OpflcWa. 

SE. Ti ow ; /carcc tovtov tov Xoyov dpa p.aX- 
Xov pev to kolXov rjpuv ear! tcov ovtcov, tjttov Se to 
paj kclXov ; 



be rendered thus : " Does not 
this constitute the existence of 
the Not-Beautiful 1 " (clXXo tl 

ovtco o-vp.^e',3rjKev elvai to lltj 

Kakov.) " ist, that it is parted 
off (a<$opio-8ev) as belonging to 
a certain kind of existences 
(rivbs yevovs tcov ovtcov : for the 
gen., cf. Eep. 4, 438 d); 2nd, 
that it is set over against 
something which exists." A 
simpler rendering of the words 
may possibly be right if suffi- 
cient stress is laid upon ehai. 
" The Not-Beautiful, as distin- 
guished from a certain kind of 
existence, and again as op- 
posed to an existing some- 
what, has thus an existence of 
its own." But the words av 
wd\iv indicate that the tl t£>v 
ovtcov is different from the 
yeW. The former interpreta- 
tion is confirmed by compar- 
ing supra 257 c in the cor- 
responding partition of know- 
ledge : to 8' inl Tcp yiyvo/xc-vov 
p-epos avTrjs €<acrTov dcpopiadev — 
where hri tco yiyvofxevov answers 
to the genitive here. Accord- 
ing to this rendering, the read- 
ing el/6?, although omitted in 
the Bodleian MS., is not clearly 
wronar. 



4. ' Ovtos S17 7rp6s ov — fxr] 
KaXoV] 17 is omitted before 
uvtL6c-o-i<: in Bodl. A n, and 
has been rejected by Stall- 
baum and C F. Hermann : ti 
after elvai is omitted only in 
Flor. c, i, but can hardly be 
retained. It was omitted by 
Stephanus. If 17 and tl are 
retained, the words must be 
construed thus : " Then it re- 
sults that the opposition of 
the Not-Beautiful" (17 dvTidecris, 
to p.ri koXov, apposition) "is one" 
(lit. "something," tl) "between 
being and being." Omitting 
17 and tl we should render " It 
results then that the notion 
of 'not-beautiful' is an oppo- 
sition of being to being." 

In the use of dvTideo-ts here, 
as of ovcria below (p. 258 b), 
there is some confusion be- 
tween abstract and concrete. 

avTidecris crvpftalvei] The 

Bodl. has dvTiBecriv and elvai tl. 
If avTiBeaiv is right, crvfJ.(3alvei 
is impersonal. 

9. p.r] koXov] Cf. Parm. 160 
b : Tt 8' e'l tis \eyoi, el fieye8os 

fXTj eCTTLV 77 O-fllKpOTTJS LLTj eCTTLV 

7} tl aXXo tcov tolovtcov, ap' €<£' 
eicdo-Tov civ SrjXol oti erepdV tl 
Xeyet to [if] ov ; I. e. that the 



20<M2TH2. 



1G1 



257. 0EAI. OvSev. 

258. £?E. 'O/uotW a/)a to //.)) /xeya /cat to //€ya aurb 
eluai Ae/creou ; 

0EAI. 'Ofioim. 

A*E. Oweotw /cat ro fir) Sikcuov tg> Sikolicd Kara 
TOOJTOL Oereou npb? to fir)8ei> tl fiaXXov eivai darepov 
Oarepov ; 

9EAI. Tifirfv; 

3?E. Kal rdXXa Sr) Tavrrj Xetjofieit, iirehrep r) 6a- 
repov (pvcris tcpavr) twv ovtcdv ovo~a, eKeivr)? Se ovarjs 
avayKq Sr) /cat tol fibpia ai)Tr)s fir)8evbs ryrrov ovtol 
TiOevai. 

0EAI. ITa)? yap ov; 

SE- Ovkovv, 639 eoLKtv, r) tt/s Oarepov fiopiov <pv- 

h crecos Ka\ rrjs rod ovtos irpbs akXrfXa avriKeifiivcov 

avridecris ouSeis rynov, el 6ifiis direlv, avrov rov ovtos 



Thus each 
of the parts 

IO of Other 
has a real 
existence, 
and the 
opposition 
between 
the several 
parts of 
Being and 
Other is 

x 5 also Being. 



thing denied (or negatively 
predicated) in each case is 
different. 

2. 'Ofioias c'ipa] " Then the 
not-great must be said to exist 
equally with the great." (avro 

to peya.} 

5. t» 8iKaiq> — 6eriov\ " Be 

put in the same category with 
the just so far as their equally 
existing is concerned." For 
the limitation with 7rpo?, cf. 

Phsedo 75 a • Ta^T-O" y^p scttiv, 
3> 2., TTpos ye o fiovXerai 8r)\ooo-ai 
6 \6yos. 

14. f) — avTideo-is] The order 

is 7] avTi6e<ris popiov rrjs darepov 
(pvo~ea>s koi (poplovj ttjs rov ovtos 
7rp6s aWrfka avTiKeipevmv. The 

rendering of Heindorf and 
Stallbaum, " oppositio naturas 
partis alicujus," is objection- 



able, because the expression 
darepov (pdais has been already 
appropriated to the Other in 
general. Besides, the argument 
does not lead here to the con- 
trast of Being and all other 
ideas, but to that between ex- 
isting things and their nega- 
tions. The present is simply 
the generalization of the pre- 
ceding argument. The mean- 
ing is, in other words, that 
negation is, equally with affir- 
mation, a real determination of 
thought. 

16. el depis elne'iv] Another 
expression of the awe in which 
the idea of Being was held 
(on which vid. supra p. 243 c) ; 
also marking anew the reluc- 
tance with which the authority 
of Parmenides is impugned. 



162 



nAATONOS 



And such 
negative 
determina- 
tions arc 
the Not- 
Being, of 
which we 
have been 
so long in 



Therefore, 
as Being 
includes all 
true deter- 
minations 
of thought, 
Not-Being 
is a kind of 
Being. 



ovcrla eo~Tiv, ovk evavTiov eKelvcp ayptalvovaa, aWa p. 258 
toctovtov piovov, e\epov eKelvov. 

GEAI. 1a(f)eaTaTa ye. 

fiE. Tiv ovv avTrjv irpoaeLTToifiev ; 
5 GEAI. Arjkov on to pr) ov, o Sia tov aocfjiarrju 
i£r)TOVfJL€is, avro ecm tovto. 

HE. UoTepov ovv, wairep ernes, eariv ovSevb? tcov 
aXXwv ovaias eXXet7rop.evov, /cat Sel OappovvTa rjSr) 
Xeyeiv otl to pnj bv /3e/3atW eo~Ti, tyjv avTOv (pvaiv 
ioevoi/, cocnrep to p.eya y)v pieya /cat to kolaov iiv Kakov c 
/cat to per) pceya *[p.r) pieya]* /cat to pur] KaXbv *[p.r) kcl- 
Xov]*, ovtco 8e /cat to p.r/ bv /cara Tambv rjv re /cat 
ecrTL pit) bv, evaptOpiov tcov 7roXXcov ovtcov elSo? ev ; 
7] TLva eri irpb<s ai)To, co QeaiTijTe, airixTTvav e^opiev ; 
H GEAI. Ovdepilav. 



8. oicrias iXkeiirofievovJ ovcrias 
is not exactly a genitive of re- 
spect, but depends on eXXeiV. 
in the same construction as 
the second genitive in such 
expressions as k\vco o-ov (pdivrji 
— davnd£a> o~ov tt)s 8iavaias. 

9. /3ei3aiW] " Incontrover- 
tibly." 

ecrri, ttjv] Edd. earl rrjv. 

I have changed the accentua- 
tion of io-rt, which does not 
seem here to be merely an 
auxiliary verb with ex ov - 

11. Ka\ to fir] fj-eyaj The edi- 
tors have followed Boeckh in 
repeating /jltj /xeya and /at] ko\6v. 
This is possibly right, but not 
necessary, for the sense is 
easily completed by supplying 
tju } which is the emphatic word. 

12. tjv re Kai eari] He passes 

from the r\v of reference (" We 
found it to be so") to that of 



certainty (" It proves to be 
so"), eo-ri is introduced as 
more plainly contradicting 
Parmenides. 

13. ivapiOnov — ei8os ei>] Cf. 
Parm. 160 c. 

It is to be noticed here that 
while the notion of Not-Being 
is modified, there is a transi- 
tion also in that of Being. 
Through communion with Not- 
Being, i. e. with the Other or 
Difference, both in general and 
particular, Being has become 
concrete instead of merely ab- 
stract, logical instead of purely 
ideal. Being is the sum of 
all positive existences, at the 
same time having an existence 
separate from them (Other 
than their's). Socher observed 
this, but had not perceived the 
dialectical progress by which 
this result is appi-oached. 



20<I>I2TH2. 



163 



258. SE. OlaO' ovv otl Ylapfxevibr) ptaKpoTe'pm T/79 
airopp-qcrews rj7TLaTr}Kap.ev ; 
0EAI. Ti8ri\ 

£"E. YlXelov rj \elvos aTrehre aKOTreiv, rjpels els to 
irpoaOev en ^yTijaavres 1 a.Tre8el^apev avTco. 
GEAI. Um; 
d 2?E. Otl 6 fiev irov (f)r]o-Lv, 

ov yap fxr] 7Tore tovt iovSa/utji etvai fxr] eovra, 
aWa <tv rrjcrS'' ct<j) 6Sov Sifycrios elpye voijixa. 

0EAL Aeyet yap ovv ovto>?. 

SE. 'HjueFy 8i ye ov \xovov ws earTi to. firj ovtcl 
a7re8eLfja.iJ.ev, aAAct /cat to el8os b TvyyaveL bv tov per) 
0VT09 a.7re(f)r)vdp,efla' ttjv yap OaTepov (f)vcriv a7ro8el- 
IjavTe? ovaav re /cat KaTaKeKeppLaTLaptevrjv hfi iravTa 
e to. ovTa Trpb? dXXrjXa, to Trpb? to ov eK.ao~Tov popLOv 
avTrjs dvTLTL0ep.evov eToXfirjaapLev elirelv wy avTO 

TOVTO eCTTLV OVTCO? TO fJLT} OV. 

GEAI. Kcu TTavTairaai ye, co ije've, dXrjOeaTard 
fiOL SoKodfiev elpijKevaL. 

£E. M.7) TOIVVV rjpLOLS eLTTYj TLS OTL TOVVaVTLOV TOV 



■\Yt: have 
lint, only 
disobeyed 
Parmeni- 

des, but 
have de- 
fined the 
Nature of 
5 that which 
he forbade 
us to Dame. 
Theessence 
of Not- 
Being is 
the nega- 
tive rela- 
tion be- 
tween each 
existing 
kind and 
that which 
is Other 
than it. 



1. ncutporepcos Trjs anopprjo-eas] 
I. e. r) atrtinev fjpiv. 

2. r]TVKTTrjKap,(v\ The use of 
this word immediately after 
airia-Tia, in a different sense, 
deserves to be noted. "We 
have carried onr disobedience 
to Parmenides beyond the let- 
ter of his prohibition." 

8. fov8afij)-\-] I propose to 
read touto <j>arj] here, as above, 
p. 237 a, q. v. diCrjp-evos occurs 
here also as a various reading, 
but it does not seem impos- 
sible that Plato should 



to quote the words of Parme- 
nides more exactly in one 
place than in another. 

14. KaTaKeKeppaTicrp,<;v7]v] Plato 

is fond of this word. For a 
parallel use, cf. Parm. 144 c. 

15. to 7Tp6? dvTiTi8ep.evov~\ 

Join to bv eKaarov, for which 
cf Rep. 5? 480 : avTO eKacrrov to 
ov. Cratyl. 389 C : els to epyov 
eKao-Tov. Compare also ra>v 
ovtcov eKao-Tov oXov in Theset. 

174 a. 

20. Mr} ovk ecrriv] " Let 110 

man, then, say of us that we 

2 



164 



nAATONOS 



ovtos to fly ov (hrocjjaLvoLievoi ToXpcopev Xeyeiv coy p. 258 
eaTiv. ypei? ydp nepi pev evavTiov tivos olvtw yai- 
peiv iraXai Xeyopiev, eiT eanv e'/re per), Xoyov eypv rj 
kou iravTcmao-iv dXoyov. o Se vvv eiprjKa/JLev elvai to p. 259 
sprj ov, rj iretaaTw ti? a>? ov KaXcos Xeyopcev eXeyjkus, 
?; p-€XP L 7r€ P av ddvvaTr}, XeKTtov koli €K6iva> KaOairep 
7]fid<s Xeyopcev, otl crvpp.iyvvTai re aAA?;Ao£9 to. yevrj 

KOU TO T6 OV KOU 0a.T6pOV 8l(X TTOLVTWV KOU Si dXXt]- 

Xcov SieXrjXvdoTa to p.ev eTepov peTaa^ov tov ovto? 

10 eWtl ptev Sid TavT-qv ttjv fie'de^iv, ov pr)v £k.61v6 ye 

ov LieTeayev dXK eTepov, eTepov Se tov ovtos ov, ecrTi 

aa(f)eaTaTa ilj dvayKt]? elvai fir) ov' to 8e ov av 



declare Not-Being the contrary 
of Being, and dare to affirm 
that it exists. We have long 
ago shaken hands with the 
question of an opposite to 
being, whether one exists or 
not, and whether this be 
capable or wholly incapable of 
definition. But for our pre- 
sent account of Not-Being, let 
a man either refute us and 
persuade us that we are in 
error, or, so long as he cannot, 
he too must say as we say, 
that there is an inter-commu- 
nion of the kinds, and that 
Being and Difference traverse 
all things, and mutually inter- 
penetrate, so that the other 
partakes of being, and by rea- 
son of such participation is, 
yet is not that of which it 
partakes, but an Other : and 
being Other than Being, it is 
clearly the case, of necessity, 
that it is not-Being. While 
Being, through partaking of 
the Other, must be other tlian 
the remaining kinds, and as 



other than all, is not each one 
of them, and is not all the rest, 
but itself only ; so that there 
are infinite cases in which 
Being again is not, and in like 
manner the remaining kinds, 
whether taken severally or all 
together, in many respects are, 
and in many respects are not." 
Cf. Legg. 10, 899 c: "H 818a- 
ctk€LV r)pas rj tj/juv Treidecrdai. 

Being is therefore distinguished 
from the sum of positive de- 
terminations. Compare the 
attempt towards the close of 
the Thesetetus to distinguish 
the I8ea rrj9 (rv\\a(3rjs from the 

2. nep\ fiev ivavrlov tlvos] 
As often happens in sentences 
begun with nep\, the syntax is 
not quite exact. " As for an 
opposite of Being, we have 
long said good-bye to that in- 
quiry."^ 

II. e<TTL cra(pe<TTara e| avaynrjs 

eii/at] These words are re- 
peated from 256 d. to eTepov 
is the subject of efocu, and (to 



2CXM2TH2. 



259. Oarepov fi€T€iAr)(j)b? erepov toov aXXcov av ehj yevcov, 

" erepov S" eKeivcov airavTCdv ov ovk eanv €koc(ttov 

avTcov ov8e ^vpnravra ra aXXa ttXi]v olvto, ware to 

bv avap<pio~(3r)T7]Too? av pcvpia errl pvpioi? ovk eo~Ti, 

koll rdXXa 8rj KaO' eKaarov ovrco Kal ^vpnravra iroX- 

Xaxf) P-ev ean, iroXXaxfj & ovk ecrTiv. 

0EAI. 'AA^;. 

HE. Kal ravTai? 8rj rah evavTicocreaiv elre anri- 

0~T6L TI?, CTKeTTTeOV aVTW KOL XtKTtOV filXTLOV TL TCOV 

c vvv elprjpevcov' eire to? ti yaXeirbv KaTavevorjKco? 

ypipSl TOTE p.€V €7T£ OoLTtpa T0T6 8' €7Ti Oarepa TOVS 

Xoyov? eXKcov, ovk a^ia ttoAAt;? cnrov8rjs laiT0v8a- 
Kev, coy ol vvv Xoyoc (pacri. tovto pcev yap ov re ti 
ko/ulxJ/ov ovre \aXeirov evpeiv, eKeivo 8' r)8r) Kal ^aXe- 
ttov apa Kal KaXov. 

0EAI. To ttoIov ; 

HE. *0 Kal irpoaOev e'lpTjTat, to Tama edcravTa 
&>? "j~oWara~j~ tols Xeyopevoi? olov t elvai Ka6' eKaaTov 



Our argu- 
ment has 
shewn the 
worthless- 

IQ nessof that 
easy and 
childish 
logic which 
relies on 
the expo- 
sure of con- 
tradictions, 
when com- 
pared with 

1 5 that which 
is at once 
difficult 
and valu- 
able, the 
real criti- 
cism of 



erepov) etvai pr) ov of eo-Tiv. The 
Words erepov rov ovros ov are ill 

agreement with rb erepov. 

8. Kal — (pao-i] " If this ap- 
parent contradiction awaken 
doubt, let doubt lead to in- 
quiry. But if made the occa- 
sion of logomachy by men who 
delight in working out and 
bringing into relief the oppo- 
site sides of such antinomies, let 
such men learn from the above 
argument that it is childish to 
mistake the different for the 
incompatible." Mr. Grote ob- 
serves that this would be no 
unfair description of Plato's 
own procedure in the Parme- 
nides. To which it may be 
rejoined that, as Mr. Grote 



himself points out, the diffi- 
culties of the Parmenides are 
regarded by their author as a 
preparatory exercise, stimu- 
lating the mind to further 
study, whereas in the case 
here supposed the difficulties 
are raised for their own sake. 
II. rovs Xoyovs I'Xkcoi/] The 
picture of men tearing an 
argument "to tatters, to very 
rags," is one which frequently 
occurs. Cf. Phileb. 57 d : rots 

deivols Tvep\ \6ya>v 6\kj]V. 

14. »cai ^akenov apa <a\ KaAoV] 
According to Plato's favourite 
proverb, on xa\f7ra Ta KaXd. 

18. us f§vvard\] Either "as 
easily managed" (cf. ov xa^enbv 
supra,), or "as possible to be" 



166 



nAATONo: 



arguments 
according 

to their 
genuine 

meaning. 
That ana- 
lysis which 
makes ab- 
solute se- 
verance 
between 
different 
forms is at 
the oppo- 
site pole 
from true 
philosophy: 
for without 



eXeyyovT eiraKoXovOelv, otolv re ti? eTepov ov 7rrj p. 259 p. 
tolvtov elvai (f)y kol otolv tolvtov ov eTepov, eKelvt] d 

KCLL KOLT eK€lVO O (j)7]0~L TOVTCOV TTeTTOvOeVOLl 7TOTepOV, TO 

Se tolvtov eTepov dirofyaiveiv ufirj ye 7rr) kou to 6ol- 
5 Tepov tolvtov kou to fxeya a/iiKpov kol to o/jlolov 

olvo/jlolov, kou yaipeiv ovtco TOLvavTia del irpofapovTa 

ev T0I9 \6yoLS, ov Te tls ekey^os ovto? dhrjOivb? 

dpTL Te tcov ovtcov tlvos e<pa7TTO/j.evov St]\os veoye- 

vrj9 d)V. 
10 GEAI. Ko/juSfj fxev ovv. 



— the latter is more probable. 
" Letting these contradictions 
alone, as not inconsistent Avith 
the nature of things." (ovk 
dBCuara, Par. F. marg.) In sup- 
port of the former (which, 
however, is hardly Greek), cf. 
Phileb. 14 d : pr/ Seii> tcov tol- 
ovtcov aTTTeaflat, nat8apico8rj Kal 
pa8ta Kal acpodpa rots Xoyois ip- 
7r68ia. The word is suspici- 
ous, and Badham conj. dvrjWTa. 
It is more likely that a few 
letters have dropt out, e. g. 
ravra idaavra cos 8vvar ov pd- 
\10-T\a. 

(18.) olov t etvai — 7r6repov] 
" To be able to apply his rea- 
son to each particular point in 
a discussion, and to bring any 
man to the test who says that 
what is other in some respect 
is the same, or what is the 
same is other, by reasoning 
with him on that ground and 
of that particular relation, in 
which he says that either of 
these predicates is applicable." 

I. iXeyxovra irraKoXovdelvj Cf. 

Rep. 7> 534 c: ^>°" 7Te p * v H-^xn $ ia 

iravrcov iXey^cov 8ie£iu>v — iv 7ruai 
tovtols dnrcoTi tco Xoyco 8t,cnro- 
ptvrjTai. 



3. tear ineivo o = k. e. Ka6' 6] 

The want of this power is 
again noted as the defect of 
dvTikoyiKT) in Piep. 5, 454 c. 

This passage has been curi- 
ously mistranslated by Hegel : 
Geschichte der Phil. p. 210. 
See Introduction to Sophist, 
sub finem. 

7. ov re tis veoyevTjS cov~\ 

" This is no real exercise of 
reason, but on the face of it 
the childish offspring of one 
who has but a recent ac- 
quaintance with the true ob- 
jects of thought." Cf. Rep. 7, 
539 b : ol peipaKio-KOi, orav to 
7rpa>rov Xoycov yevcovTai, cos 7rai8ia 
avTols Karaxpcovrai, del els dvTi- 
Xoy'iav xpco/xepot, Kal pipovpevoi 
tovs i£eXey%ovTas avrol aXXovs 
i£eXeyxovcn, ^a/poi/rer cocnrep ctkv- 
XaKia tco eXicew re Kal tTTrapdrreiv 
rbv ttXi]ctiov aet. 

8. veoyevrjs] Cf. Theset. 160 
e : tovto (pcopev crbv eivai olov 
veoyeves Tral8iov. Perhaps veo- 

yevrjs has here the meaning 
(which Hegel gives it) = viov 
yivvr]p.a. (Cf. Shakspeare's 
" the baby of a girl.") See 
the unusual meaning given to 
vvpcptVTrjs in Polit. 268 a. 



scxmsths. 



167 



259. 37E. K a i yap, <*> 'ya6e, to ye irav goto iravro? "commu : 
hri")(6Lpelv airoyodpLiJEiv aXXcos re ovk tufieXe? /ecu 8r) kinds" 
e kcu iravTairaaLv dfj-ovaov tivos kcu d(hiXoao(f)ou. be no dis- 

„ , , course. 

0EAI. Tt 8y ; 

HE. TeXecoTaTr) irdvTcav Xoycov lariv dfyaviais to 5 
8ia\v€t,v eKaarou goto ttolvtcdv' Sid yap tyjv dXXiiXcou 
twv elbwv arvpirXoKi]v 6 Aoyo? yeyovev 7)\uv. 

0EAI. 'AXrflri. 

360. 3*E. 2/C07T€i TOLVVV GO? €V KOLipW VVV 8rj TOl? TOl- 

ovtol? Sie/jLaxofxeOa kcu irpocnqvayKaipixev kav erepov 10 
irepco fuyvvcrOaL. 

0EAI. Upos 8r) ti; n d 

SE. IlpO? TO TOP XoyOV rjfJUV TWV OVT(£)V €V Tl And at the 
„<y /\ /\\/ present 

yevQiv eivcu. toutov yap crTeprj6ei/T€9 to p.tv P*yi- juncture 



2. inixeipe'iv] " To go about 
to separate." The word is 
redundant, as often in Plato : 
e. g. supra 235 e. Phaedr. 
265 e. 

3. d/iova-ov twos] Because 
fiovaiKfj is conversant with Xo'- 
yoi. Cf. Theset. 156 a. 

5. TeXecoraTT) — irdvTcav] This 

truth is the key to the present 
dialogue, and gives unity to what 
seems unconnected. The chief 
characteristic of the Sophist is 
avrikoyiKT], an art of negation 5 
and even the Elenchus, as pro- 
fessed by him, has the defect 
of being purely negative, and 
is valuable only in clearing the 
way for positive speculation. 
It is by means of this contro- 
versial or negative dialectic 
that the Sophist eludes us 
when we try to fix upon him 
the reproach of being a pre- 
tender. And Parmenides has 
given occasion for this kind of 



reasoning, by drawing the line 
so sharply between being and 
not-being. Of the same nature 
was the difficulty we encoun- 
tered in considering the ex- 
clusive antithesis of rest and 
motion. This whole class of 
difficulties is solved when we 
perceive that positive and ne- 
gative are indissolubly united 
in the nature of things : and 
in particular we are enabled to 
transfix the Sophist by proving 
to him that negation is applic- 
able to thought and speech. 

9. rots toiovtois\ Sc. rots 
fir]8ev e<DO~iv Koivaviq ira6r]jxaTos 
erepov ddrepov Trpoaayopeveiv, 

p. 252 c. f 

14. tovtov yap arepq&Vrer] 

" For if compelled to relinquish 
this, the greatest evil would be 
that we must give up philo- 
sophy ; but besides this, at 
this moment we are required 
to agree upon a definition of 



168 



IIAATQNQ2 



conveni- 
ence of 

l).i\ ing es- 
tablished 
this com- 
munion, for 
our next 
business 
is to define 
Discourse, 
whereas if 
forms were 
incommu- 
nicable, we 
should not 
have been 
able to 
discourse 
at all. 
The reason 
why this 
is neces- 
sary is that 
the Sophist 
has yet an- 
other hold 
on us. He 
may assert 
that Not- 
Being can- 
not enter 
into Dis- 
course. 



arov (f)iAo(To(pias av aTepi]0eipev, eri 8" ev tco ttol- p. z6c 
povn del Xoyov rjpa? Siop.oXoyi)aaa6aL tl ttot ecrTLV, 
el Se d(j)r)pefli]p,ev ai)To pc^S" elvaL to Trapdirav, ovSev 
av en nov XeyeLV oloi T rjp.ev. d(()yjpedr]pev 6" av, 
5 el avvey^oprjaapev p.i]8ep.lav eivai ji'l^lv p.r)8evl irpos h 
pr)8e'v. 

0EAI. 'Opdat? tovto ye. Xoyov Se 8l 6 tl vvv 
SiopLoXoyi]Te'ov ovk epaOov. 

mE. AAA \o~co9 TyS" eiropievos paorr av p.a6oi$. 

to geai. n^ ; 

SE. To pcev Sr) pr) bv rjpuv ev tl twv aXXcov yevos 
bv ave(pdvr), /caret irdvTa to. ovTa Stecnrappevov. 

0EAI. Ovrm. 

/H*E. Ovkovv to p.eTa tovto crKeTTTeov el So^rj re 
15/cai Xoycp ptlyvvTaL. 

GEAI. T/&J; 

SE. M?) p.Lyvvp.evov p.ev avTov tovtols avayKaiov 
aXrjOrj ttclvt elvaL, pLLyvvp.evov Se Sotja re \J/evSr)$ c 
yiyveTaL /cat Aoyos" to yap to. pr) ovTa So{jd(JELV r) 
10 XeyeLV, tovt eo~TL ttov to \j/evSo?, ev SLavola re koi 
\oyoL$ yLyvop.evov. 

GEAI. Ovtcos. 

HE. "O^roy Se ye yj/evSov? eaTLv cmaTr}, 



Discourse, whereas, if the very 
existence of discourse were 
utterly taken from us, I pre- 
sume we could not then dis- 
course at all" (much less dis- 
course upon Discourse). 

11. To \x.ev 8rj — av«$)avrj\ Viz. 

The application of the notion 
of Other to those things from 
which Being, or any part of 
Being, is distinguished. 

12. diecnrapfjLtvov] Supr. 255 



e, 257 c. 

14. el — ulyvvrm] The way 
is now prepared for the con- 
tinuation of the argument 
which was dropped p. 236 e. 

18. 86ga re \j/ev$i)<; ylyverai kcl\ 

Xdyoy] See, in addition to 
passages elsewhere cited, Cra- 
tyl. 385-387. 4 2 9> 436- 

20, ev diavoia — yiyvop.evov~\ 
" Which thus arises in the re- 
gion of thought and speech." 



20cM2TH2. 169 

200. 0EAI. Nat. In other 
i— i \ y f r t words : 
AE. Kal p-nv airarm ovcrm el8coXcov re Kal eiKO- Negation 

^ct)v 77<5?7 kcu (havTacrlas 1 navTa avayKi] fieara eivai. but False- 

^^ „ N v hood is nut. 

0EAI. llco? yap ov ; 

AE. To^ 8e cro(pi(TTrju e<papev ev rourft) irov rw5 
d ro7Ttt> KOLTairefevyevcu pev, efjapvov 8e yeyovevai to 
ivapairav prfi eivai \j/ev8o9' to yap prj bv ovt€ 8ia- 
voelaOai Ttva ovte Xey&v' ovaia? yap ov8ev ovdapfj 

TO prj OV fieT€)(€ll/. 

0EAI. 3 Hv Tama. IO 

SE. Nvv 8e ye tovto pev etydvrj peTeyov tov ovtos, 
dxrre TavTrj pev torcos ovk av pd\oiTO en' Taya 8' av 
(f)alr} tqjv el8cov to. pev peTeyeiv tov prj ovtos, to. 8' 
ov, Kal Xoyov 8rj real 8o£av eivai tcov ov peTeyovTcov. 
(00-T6 tt]v el8coXo7rouKrjv Kal (paPTaaTLKTjv, ev f] (f)apev 15 
e avTov eivai, 8iapd\oiT av iraXiv d>9 TravTairacriv ovk 
eaTiv, e7rei8r) 86^a Kal Xoyos ov Koivoovei tov prj ov- 
tos' ^ev8o9 yap to irapanrav ovk eivai TavT7]s prj 
crvvio-Tapevris tyjs Koivwvias. 81a tovt ovv Xoyov Hence 

v *'f- v Jl ' £ r r, , there arises 

TrpcoTov Kai oo^av Kai (pavTacriav oiepevvr]Teov o tl 20 the neces- 

> v ?i , r v \ / j r, sity of ex- 

7T0T eCTTLV, LVa (paveVTCOV Kai Tl)v KOLVCOViaV aVTCOV amining 

„s- . « x 3/ /j, 5,/ (nv \ 1 ^^ ,\ speech, 

201. T(p pi] OVTl KaTlOCOpeV, KaTlOOVTeS Oe TO "^revOO? OV opinion, 

3. ndvra — fieara eivai] Cf. communion is said to unite, 

Thepet. 170 c: ml ivavra tvov instead of the elements unit- 

Hea-ra ravOpcoTviva fyrovvrwv 81- ing in communion, just as 9 

dao-Kcikovs re Kal cipxovras avrmv P-axV ovvivTarai is put for oi 

K.r.X. Crat. 411 C. paxop.evoi o-vvlaravrai els fiaxqv. 

6. egapvov be yeyovevai] pp. 20. 8d|ai> Kal cpavrao-iav] This 

239-241. distinction is in advance of the 

1 5. (pavTaa-TiKTjv] Distinguish- psychology of the Theretetus. 

ed from elicao-TiKr), the Other 21. "iva KaTidapev] " That 

species of eldcoXonouKTi, supr. when we have found them, we 

p. 236 c. may. also observe their com- 

16. irakiv] I. e. As before in munion with Not-Being." 
the case of p.f] ov. 22. to yj/evSos bv] "That 

18. p.f] o-wio-rapev-qs] The falsehood exists." 



170 



riAATONOS 



and imagi- 
nation, that 
we may see 
whether 
or no they 
partake of 
Not-Being. 
The So- 
phist ap- 
pears likely 
to prove 
a very 
Sphinx, 
proposing 
to us one 
riddle after 
another. 
But we 
must not 
lose heart ; 
and, after 
all, his 
chief for- 
tress is 
already 
taken. 



diro8ei£ > tt)pev, diro8ei^avTes 8e tov cro(])iarTr)v eh avTo p. 261 1 
€v8i]cra)fiei> i etirep evo\o9 eanu, rj /cat diroXvaavTes ev 
aXXco yevei {rjrcopev. 

0EAI. KofuSf) 8e ye, a> £e've, eoiKev dXrjOe? eivai 

5 to 7repi tov ao(f)iaTi]v /car dpyas XeyOev, on 8vo~0r}- 
pevTOv eirj to yevos. (pa'tverou yap ovv 7rpofiXr)paT0JV 
yep.eiv, &v e7ret8dv n 7rpo(3aXr), tovto wpoTepov dva- 
yKoiov 8iapdyeo~6ai nplv eV avTOv ifcelvov d(f)iKecr6ca. 
vvv yap poyis pcev to pr) ov coy ovk ecrTi 7rpo(3Xr)0ev 

10 8ieirepdo-ap.ev, erepov 8e 7rpo(3e'(3Xr)Tai, /cat <5et 8rj \jsev- b 
809 coy eo~TL /cat ire pi Xoyov /cat irepl 8ofjav a7ro5et£at, 
/cat /MeTa tovto tcrcoy erepov, /cat er aAAo per eKelvo' 
Kai nepas, coy eot/cez/, ov8ev tyavrjcreTai noTe. 

212. Qappelv, cb QeaiTr)T€, %prj tov /cat crpLKpbv tl 

15 8vvap.evov eh to irpocrOev del irpoievai. n yap o y' 
d6vp.wv ev tovtols 8paaeuev dv ev aAAoty, rj p.r)8ev ev 
e/cetVoty dvvTcov rj /cat irdXiv els TOviriuOev diratcrOeh ; 
o-)(oXfi 7Tov, to /caret tyjv irapoiplav Xeyop,evov, o ye 



1. civto] to y^evbos. 

2. etVep evoxos i<TTiv~\ " If he 

is liable to be beld therein." 
The word, without losing the 
legal association, recovers the 
original metaphorical sense. 
Cf. irpoxeipov, Theset. 198 d, 
and note. The same remark 
applies to aTrokio-avres, " freeing 
him" (at once acquitting and 
liberating). 

5. kclt dpxas] 218 c, 223 b, 
226 a. 

6. Trpof$\r)ixa.T(>>v yepeiv] Cf. 

Theset. 161 a : o'Ui p,e \6ycou 
riva eivai 6v\clkov kcu padicos 
e£e\6i>Ta ipeiv cos ovk av e'^ft 
ovT<a ravra. 

7. TrpofidXr)] Referring to 
■n-pofikrjpdToiv, which partly re- 



tains the etymological sense. 
TtpofiaKkeiv is here to throw in 
front as a screen or defence. 
Cf. Polit. 279 d. 

8. 8iapaxeo~6ai\ " To fight 
through." dia retaining the 
original meaning. 

10. 7rpo[3e[3\T]Tai] The perf. 
pass, is perhaps used here with 
middle signification, = " has 
thrown before him ;" but the 
word is more probably to be 
taken passively: = "Another 
problem is set." 

12. 'i<rws erepov\ Sc. 8(rj(rei 
Tvpof$\rj8ev dimrepacrai. 

1 6. ev tovtois\ DC. ev ois irpo- 
eiatv. 

iv eKeivois] Sc. toIs aWois. 



20<M2TH2. 



171 



26 1. toiovtos av 7T0TC eXoi ttoXlv. vvv ft eirel, u> 'ya6e, 
c tovto o Aeyet? foaireirepavTcu, to tol peyiaTov rjpuv 
Ttlyps r/prj/ievov av etrj, tol 8" dXXa ySr] paa> kcu 
a/jLiKporepa. 

0EAI. KaAcoy ei7rey. 5 

2E. Aoyov 8r) irpojTOV koll Soijav, KaOdirep ipprjdt] 
vvv 8r}, Xd(3cop.€v, tv evapyearepov *d.7roXoyLO-(op.€@a*, 
TTorepov avTcov (mrerai to p.r) bv rj TravTairacriv 
dXrjdrj fiev io~TLV dp.(j)6r€pa ravTa, yj/evdos 1 Se ovSe- 
7T0T€ ovderepov. IO 

0EAI. 'Op6m. 
d S'E. <$>epe 8r), KaOdirep hri tcov eldcov Kcti tcov Our first 
ypap/xarcov eXeyopcev, wepl tcov ovo/xarcov ttoXlv be to ask 

(/",./ , z / / * n e same 

coaavTcos tTrLLTKeylrcopeOa. (paLverai yap tttj ravTrj question 

\ « >. / ' about 

TO VVV (rjTOVfXeVOV. 15 words 

v - ^ v v „ , e which we 

UEA1. lo 7TOLOV ovv or) irept rcov ovoparcov vira- have ai- 

f ready an- 

KOVCrreOV ; swered 

v*tt< T7"/ ' > \ n ' \ y ' *> about the 

2E. Eire iravra aXXyXois ZjvvappoTTeL eire per)- letters of 

<n/ y \ \ »/i/-y v rv / the alpha- 

0€V eire ra pev WeXei, ra Oe p.r). bet and the 

0EAI. ArjXov tovto ye, otl to. /xev iOeXei, tol <$' ov. 20 5^*? 



3. fiprjixevov] This use of the 
pf. pass, of alpeoa sufficiently 
confirms the MS. reading rjprj- 
<r8ac in Phileb. 66 b. The 
metaphor is suggested by 
axoXfj — eXoi ivokiv above. 

7. vvv 8rj] So also the Bodl. 
MS. (not 8e). 

*a7roXoyio-o>jite#a*] MSS. a7ro- 

\oyr)(Tcop.e6a. If the MS. read- 
ing were right, the following 
clauses would depend on Xd/3co- 
fiev, and there would be a con- 
tinuation of the metaphor from 
supr. 254 d : ddcpois aVaXXdr- 
retv. Cf. Legg. 10, 886 e. But 
the correction of Heindorf, 



received by Bekker and suc- 
ceeding editors, appears so 
exactly suited to the context, 
that it is here retained. " That 
we may reckon or infer more 
clearly." " That we may have 
better data for determining." 
diro as in dndKa^eiv, dnopavrev- 
ecrdat. 

14. Cpaiverai yap ittj TavTy] 

Because words are the ele- 
ments of speech, as letters 
are of syllables, and ideas of 
thought. 

l6. T6 77010V VnaKOV(TT€Ov\ 

" What question must I an- 
swer about names?" 



z z 



172 



riAATONOS 



To what 

extent « 1 ■ » 
thej admit 
ofcombina- 

1 1 • HI ' 

Scmif com- 
binations 
of words 
are signifi- 
cant, and 
some are 
not. 
For, as 
there are 
two chief 
parts of 
speech : 
the verb, 
which sig- 
nifies ac- 
tion, and 
the noun, 
which de- 
notes the 
agent, 
neither 
verbs with- 
out nouns 
nor nouns 
without 
verbs can 
be strung 
together so 
as to mean 
anything. 



SE. To TOiovfte XeytLS tcrcos, otl to. plv ifa^rjs p. 261. 
Xeyo/iepa koll 8r)XovvTa tl tjvvapfioTrei, to. 8e rfj e 
avve^eia pifiev aifixaivovTa uvapfioaTtL 

0EAI. Ylcos tl tout wires ; 
5 £?E. Oirep wi]6r)v viroXafiovra ere 7rpoaopoXo- 
yelv. ecrTL yap rj/xip irov tcou ttj (poavrj 7repl rrjv ov- 
er lav S^Xcofxarcof Slttop yevos. 

0EAI. IlcSff; 

SE. To fiku ovofiara, to Se pr]p.ara kXtjOIv. p. 26a. 

to 0EAI. Et7re eKorepov. 

3E. To fiev eVt tolls Trpd^ecrLV ov 8rjXcop.a pr)p,d 
7rov Xeyofiev. 

0EAI. Nai. 

HE. To Se y eV au rots' tKeiva irpaTTOvcn arj- 
15 pelov Trjs (j)covf}s tTTLTeOev ovofm. 

0EAI. KopLlSfj flCP OVV. 

SE. Ovkovv e£ ovopLccTcov i±ev fiopcop arvve)(css 
Xeyofievutv ovk kern iroTe Xoyos, ovS' av prjpLaTcov 
■^copls 6po/jl(ztoc>i> Xey6evT(ov. 
20 0EAI. TavT ovk e/iaOop. 

HE. ArjXou yap cos Trpos erepop tl (SXeiraov apTi b 



9. To /iei> ovopara, to Se P77- 

/xara kXij&V] The distinction 
of noun and verb is here in- 
troduced as something wholly- 
new. Note that ovopa is used 
first in a generic and after- 
wards in a specific meaning : 
first for " word" (supr. d) and 
then for " noun." 

II. To pev — ovopa] " The 
one, which is an expression 
standing for actions, Ave call a 
verb : the other, which is an ar- 
ticulate mark set on those who 
do the actions, we call a noun." 



14. i K eiva] The Bodl. MS. 

has eKeivas (sc. ras irpd^eis). 

18. prjudrcov] The genitive 
is governed by e'£ in the pre- 
ceding line. 

2 1. ArjXov yap] " ToU must 

surely have had something 
different in your eye when you 
agreed with me. For this is 
the very thing I meant in say- 
ing that these things (nouns 
or verbs) merely strung to- 
gether in this way do not 
make language." 



20*I2TH2. 173 

362. ^vvcofxoXoyeLS' eVei tout olvto i/3ovXo/jLr)i> enreiv, otl 
(rvveycos co8e Xeyo/xeva ravra ovk eari Xoyos. 

GEAI. Ife; 

HE. Oiov, fiaSiteL rpeyei KaOevSei, koll rdXXa 6<ra 
7rpd£ei9 (jrjfAalvei prjpara, kc\v irdvra tis i(f)e£r]9 olvt 5 
€'i7rr), Xoyov ovSev tl fiaXXov air epydtjzTai. 

GEAI. Um yap ; 

2E. Ovkovv Kcu ttolXlv otclv Xtyrjrou, Xea>v e'Xa- The most 

r/ r/ ,/ „ \ ,y 9 elementary 

<pO? L7T7T09, OCTCt T€ OVO/JLOLTa TCOU TOLS 7rpafJ€l? (XV sentence 
, , , n v v / <s \ \ must con- 

c irpaTTOvTwv coi>OLiao~Vr), koli Kara ravrrju or) rr)v 10 tain at 

/ '(>/ /-' n ' » ^ ' x least one 

avve^eiav ovoei? irco ^vvearr] Xoyos' ovoe/xiau yap ofeach 

v tf v » > / - y- > o.» > w > c> \ kind. And 

oure ovtcos ovr eKeivcos irpa^cv ovo airpa^tav ovoe the sim- 

>/ v »pn\ \ 3/ ?> \ ~ ^ j /i/ plest com- 

ovaiav ovtos ovoe fir) ovtos oyXoi. ra (pcovrjdevTa, binationof 

vv r> » / v <• / / /a noun and 

ivpiv av tis tols ovopaai ra pr/iiaTa Kepaay tote ver b ) ^^ 
5' rjp/iioore re Ka\ Xoyos eyevero evOvs r) Trpcorr) o~v\x- 15 ^arns,"^ 
TrXoKr), a^eSbv tcov Xoycov 6 wpcoTos kcu o-pUKpo- ^sSSb^ 



rai 09. 

2. ravra] Sc. ovofiara nai rjppaae re Kal — iyeveroj For 

pTjjiiara. the aorists cf. Theset. 156 e, 

5. avr] So the Bodl. MS., and note. And for the whole 
with An. cett. avr. expression, cf. Phileb.47d: pigu 

6. aTrepyd£erai\ The subject pia Xvtttjs re Kai rjdovrjs ^vpninTei 
is not tis, but Ta prjpaTa. yevopevr], 

9. ovopara — a>vopao-drj\ Here 17 irpcaTT] <Tvp.7r\oicff\ li The 

also the cogn. accus. becomes simplest combination." In 

the nominative to the passive Theyet. 202 it was suggested 

verb. that words taken singly had 

10. Kal Kara rai/Trjv — Xdyos] no signification, but only when 
" No sentence is constructed combined. Here the condi- 
by this concatenation any more tions necessary to this combi- 
that by the former one." nation are further shewn. It 

1 3. oicriav — prj ovtos] It has seems to be implied here that 

been above shewn that this is falsity is only in propositions, 

the meaning of every negative to yjsevSos iv o-wdio-ei d«, as 

proposition. Aristotle says (de An. III. 6, 

15. rjppoo-t] Sc. tcl (pavTjdevTa, § 2). This was not seen in 

" The elements of speech com- Crat. 385 d : "Eanv apa ovopa 

bine." The verb is used in a ^evbos kol d\r)6es Xiyew, e'lnep 

neuter sense, as below. ko,\ \6yov. 



and this 



174 



nAATONOS 



may be 
taken as a 
type of lan- 
guage in 

tin- most 
rudimen- 
tary form. 

It is there- 
fore true 
that of 
words, as 
of letters 
and sounds, 
only cer- 
tain com- 
binations 
are admis- 
sible. 

Every such 
combina- 
tion is a 
proposi- 
tion. 



Moreover, 
every 
proposi- 
tion, even 
the sim- 
plest, has 
a subject, 
and is of a 
certain 
quality. 



GEAI. ricoy ap code Xeyeis ; p. 262 p, 

SE. "Otolv 6*7777 tls avdptoiros pavOdvei, Xoyov 
eivou (j)rj? tovtov iXayicnov re koll irpwrov ; 

GEAI. "Eycoye. d 

5 HE. A?;Aor yap rj8t] irov Tore irepl tcov ovtwv tj 
yiyvopevcov 77 yeyovorcov ?; peXXovrcov, kou ovk ovo- 
pd^ei povov, aXXd tl irepaiveL, avpwXeKCDV rd prjpara 
rots bvopaai. 8lo Xeyeiv re avTov dXX' ov povov ovo- 
pd{J£iv earopev, kou 8r) kou to> irXeypari tovtco to 
loovopa i<p$eytjdpe0a Xoyov. 

0EAI. 'Op0m. 

HE. Qvtco 8rj KaOdirep rd irpdypara rd plv dX- 
XyXois rjppoTTe, rd 6"' ov, kou 7repl rd tt}? (frcovrj? av 
arjpe'ia rd pev oi>x dpporrei, rd 8e appbrrovra avTcov e 
15 Xoyov direipydcraTO. 

0EAI. Yiavrdiracri pev ovv. 

HE. "Ktl 8rj apLKpov To8e. 

GEAI. To irolov ; 

HE. Aoyov dvayKcuov, otclv irep fj, tlvos elvcu 
2oXoyov, prj 8e tlvos dSvvarov. 

GEAI. Ovrm. 



HE. Ox 



kou 7T0L0V TLva avrov elvcu 8el ; 



1. 2>oV] The adverb is used, 
instead of tovto, by a sort of 
attraction from n&s. 

7- aXkd ti ire palvei] " But 
effects or determines some- 
thing." Cf. Theeet. 180 a : ne- 

paveis 8e ov8e Trore ov8ev irpbs 
ov8eva avrcov. 

9. t<5 TrXeypan] The same 
metaphor is applied in the 
Politicus to the practical com- 
binations of the Statesman. 

13. ra ttjs cpavrjs o-rjpela] "The 

vocal marks on things," i. e. 



words. 7rep\ = " in the region 
of," i. e. " amongst." 

17. apiKpov rode] Sc. 'i8a>p.ev or 
\dfia>p.ev. Cf. Polit. 300 a : tl 
8e To8e ; Compare the similar 
ellipse with h8e in Thetet. 191c: 
a\X S>8e. 

1 9. twos ehai Xo'yoi'] " Must 

have a subject." Cf. Theast. 

160 a : 'AvdyKT] 8e ye ipi re Tivbs 
yiyvecrOai, orav aladavopevos yi- 
yvcopai. ala6avopevov yap, pr]8evbs 
8e alaOavopevop d8vva.Tovyiyvea6ai' 
eKelvo re tiv\ ylyveudai k.t.A. 



20<I>I2TH2. 175 

26 3 . 0EAI. ITwy <$' ov; 

aE. Ilpoae^copeu Si] rov vovv r)puv avrois. 

9EAI. Aei yovv. 

SE. Ae'Ao rolvvv aoi Xoyov, avvOeis Tvpfiypa For exam- 

, , , \ t/ cv> * ' ' ple:"The- 

7Tpa^€L 01 OVOflOLTOS KOLL prjpKXTOS' OTOV O U.V O XoyOS 5 aetetusis 

■? / , /<> sitting" is 

fj, (TV fJLOL (ppaQzlV. aproposi- 

3 ^3* 0EAI. ToLVT 6OT0U Kara Svvap.IV. which The- 

SE. Qeairrjro? Kadrjrai. picov per) piaKpo? 6 Aoyoy; the subject. 
GEAI. Oi)/c, ctAAa pceTpios. 

SE. 2ov e/3yoj> 5?) (ppd^eiv 7vepl ov r earl kou io 
orou. 

0EAI. A^Aoi^ OTl 7T€pl €/JLOV T€ KOLL €/XOS\ 

GEAI. IMos-; 

£?E. QeairrjTos, w vvv eyco SiaXeyopiai, wererou. i5"Thefete- 

0EAI. Kat tovtov ovS av eh aXXa>s envoi 7vXr)v flying," is 

j / » ■? v \ » another, of 

ep.ov t eivai koll Tvepi eptov. which the 

VT? FT N £ ' ' 'A. ' " subject is 

Ah., Ho^of oe ye tivcl (papiev uvaytaxiov eKaorrov the same. 

9 .. f But they 

eiVOLl TCOV XoyCOV. differ in 

b GEAI. NaL -Foft&one 

•—it? T'' fii> «' f ' J. ' 9 is mani- 

Ar*. Lovtcov or) woiov riva eKarepov (pareov eivai; f e8 ti y false, 

2. JJpocrexco^ev — avToh] Cf. tive, it may be true or false, 

supra 233 d: <al pot, npoo-excov and this is doubtless a quality, 

rov vovv cv pd\a airoKplvov . but belonging to its matter, 

4. 7rpayfia — pfjparos] The not its form. Plato seems to 

ovopa standing for the npaypa have taken no account of the 

and the pr^pa for the irpa^is, formal distinction, negative or 

ut supra. affirmative." Grote's Plato, vol. 

21. 7rotoV Tiva] "Since the ii. p. 448 note. See, however, 

time of Aristotle, the quality supr. 262 c, irpu^iv ovK anpa^iav, 

of a proposition has been ovaiav ovros oibe pi) Svtos. Infr. 

understood to designate its 263 e : (pao-iv re ku\ dno^aaiv. 

being either affirmative or ne- The possibility of negation has 

gative : that being formal, or been already proved: the ques- 

belonging to its form only, tion now is, whether speech or 

Whether affirmative or nega- thought can properly be made 



17( 



i o 



I7AATON02 



the other 
true. 
The true 
prnpiisit T • > 1 1 
determines 
in accord- 
ance with 
reality. 
The false 
proposition 
also deter- 



something, 
as if real, 
but that 
something 
is different 
from the 
reality. 
Therefore, 
in the se- 
cond of the 
two in- 
stancesjust 
given, The- 
setetus is 
made the 
subject of 
an unreal 
determina- 
tion, and 
of another 
predicate, 
■which is 
treated 
as if it were 
the same 



0EAI. TW plv xj/evSr] 7rov, rov 8e dXrjOr}. p- 

HE. Ae'yei 8e avrwv o fxev dXijOys to. ovra w 
eari irep\ aov. 

GEAI. Ti p-ijv ; 
5 HE. 'O 8e 8r) \lsev8r}? erepa tu>v ovtlov. 

GEAI. Nat. 

HE. Ta per) ovt apa &>? ovra Xeyei. 

GEAI. 2 X e86v. 

HE. 3 Ovtcdv 8e ye ovra ere pa irep\ gov. iroXXd 
io fxev yap €<fiafj.€v ovra 7repl eKaarov eivai 7rov, 7roXXd 
8e ovk ovra. 

GEAI. K.ojj.i8f) pk€i> ovv. 

HE. *Oi> varepov 8r) Xoyov elprjKa irep\ gov, c 
TTpcorov fxev, e£ (bi> wpLadfieOa rl ttot eari Xoyos, 
izavayKaiOTarov amov eva tu>v fipa^VTaTGdV elvai. 

GEAI. Nvu 8r) yovv ravrrj ijvvcopLoXoyrjaapLev. 

HE. 'Kweira 8e ye twos. 

GEAI. OuW 

HE. Ei 8e fir) ecrTL aos, ovk aXXov ye ov8evos. 



the object of negation, and de- 
scribed as false. In tbe Phile- 
bus also (37 e) by the quality 
of an opinion is meant truth 
or falsity : <a\ eyevero ov povov 
86£a 81a ravra aXXa ml iroid tis 
eKarepa. 

g."OvTO>v 8e ye ovra erepa nepi 

a-ov] " Really being different 
from what really is concerning 
you : for we said that in re- 
gard to each thing there ex- 
ists much that is and much 
that is not." I. e. the propo- 
sition has a real significance, 
though a significance which is 
different from the true one. 
10. ttov is to be construed 



vwep^aTas with ecpapev. N\ B. 

It is possible that in the phrase 

ovkovv 6(tol ye tcov peyakav irou 

ti k.t.X., supr. 235 e, i7ov ought 
to have been taken virepfiaTas 
with the whole sentence : = " I 
presume you know." 

15. eva reov ^pa^vrdrmv eivai\ 

Because a subject and a pre- 
dicate are essential to every 
sentence. 

19. Ei' be p.r] — oiBevos] The 
object of these words, and of 

a> vvv eya) 8ia\eyopai supra a, is 

to bring out the falsity of the 
proposition, by making it per- 
fectly clear that Thesetetus is 
the subject of whom "flying" 



20<M2TH2. 



177 



?. 263. 0EAI. Ucos yap ; 

AE. M?;5e^o? Se (ov ovS" dv Xoyo? eir) to ira- 
pairav' dire(j)r]vapev yap on tcdv dhwdrmv i]v Xdyov 
ovra fj.7]8ei>o? elvai Xoyov. 

0EAI. 'Optforara. 
d HE. rie/3i drj crov Xeyo/ieva fievroi flare pa coy to. 
avrd Ka\ fir) ovra coy ovra, iravrdiracriv a>? eomev 
r] roiavrrj crvvflecrLS e/c re prjfidrcou yiyvop.evri Ka\ 
ovo/xdroov ourcD? re kol dXr]0co? yiyveaOat Xoyos 
yj/evdr)?. 

0EAI. ' AXyflearara p.ev ovv. 

jSJE. TV Se Sr) ; Stdvoid re /ecu 86{ja /cat (^avracrla, 



which be- 
longs to 
him. And 
BUch .'1 
combina- 
ti> «ti of noun 
and veil) 
amounts 

5 really and 
truly to 
falsehood 
in speech. 
But if 
speech may 
be false, 
so may 
thought, 
opinion, 

10 and ima- 
gining. For 
thought 
and speech 
are the 



is predicated. If the propo- 
sition had no subject, it would 
not be a proposition, for it 
was shewn that every propo- 
sition has a subject : but it 
belongs to no subject except 
Thea^tetus. Therefore These- 
tetus is the subject. This 
conclusion is resumed in the 

WOl'ds itep\ brj crov \ey6pevct. 

Mr. Grote objects that here 
and in Theset. 201, Plato, who 
decries the " facts of sense," 
selects an example of which 
sense alone can judge. It may- 
be replied that, in choosing the 
simplest examples, he naturally 
lights on what is obvious to the 
senses. But, first, even in this 
case the truth or falsehood is not 
given by sense, but by reason- 
ing upon sense ; and, secondly, 
Plato would have said that 
these " sensible analogies " (al- 

o-drjTaL 6poi6rt]Tes, Polit. 285 e) 

were only symbols of the higher 
truths of which he spoke. 

3. rjv] The past tense is 
used not only because of the 



aorist cnrtcprivapev, but also to 
expi-ess that which is unalter- 
able. 

6. nepl Sj) o-ov] Compare 
the similar " ad hominem" il- 
lustration at the end of the 
Thesetetus, p. 209 b : 6Zs yap 
pe 8iavoovpevoi> cos ecrriv ovtos 

QeClLTTjTOS K.T.X. 

Uepl 8tj — pevroi Qarepa ] 

The position of pevroc has 
caused suspicion as to the 
soundness of the text, but may 
be accounted for by the em- 
phasis on o-ov. Cf. nov supr. b, 
and note. 

Xeyopeva — <rvvdeo~is] For the 
constr. cf. Phredo 69 c : x^P'-C '- 
peva 8e <ppovT)crecos kui dWaTTopc-va 
avr\ a\\i]\cov pi) o~Kiaypacpia tls fi 

T] TOiaVTT) dpSTT) K.T.A. 

7. cos eoiKev — yiyvccrdai] The 

main verb is attracted into the 
relative clause, as in Soph. 

Trach. 1238 : dvrjp oS' , cos i'oi- 
Kev, ov vepeiv e'juol (pdlvovri pol- 
pav. Cf. Euthyd. 280 d : Aeiu 
apa cos eoiKC-v. Phileb. 54 d : ovk- 
ovv, onep (Xeyov — X"P LV ^X elv ^ e " / • 

a 



178 



MAATQN02 



-Mill-. I \- 

cepl that 
thought is 
inward and 
Bilent, 

while 
speech 

In thought. 
Now in 

speech 
there is 
affirmation 
and denial : 
and the 
correspond- 
ing deter- 
mination 
when tak- 
ing place 
in thought, 
is called 
Opinion. 
And Opin- 
ion, when 
arising in 
a medium 
of sensa- 
tion, is 
called Ima- 
gining. 



pLGOv ovk ?}<5?; 8rjXov ori raura ru yevr) \j/eu8t] re kcii )>. 261 
a\rj9r) irdvO' r/pcov eV rah \j/V)(ou? iyylyverai ; 

GEAI. nw; 

HE. '0.8' e'l&ei paov, av irpwrov Xdfiys, 77 TTOT 
5 ecm kgu tl 8ca(j)epovaLi> eKacrr uXXyXcov. c 

GEAI. Aidov p.ovov. 

HE. Qvkovv 8iaifoia peu koll Xoyos tolvtov' TrXrjv 
6 f.uv euros tyjs ^/v^r}? wpos amrjv 8iaXoyo? dvev 
(pcovrj? yiyvofxevos tout ccvto r/pui> encovopiaaOr], 
10 8 idvoia ; 

GEAI. Yldvv p.ev ovv. 

HE. To 8e y air eKelvr\<s pevp.a 8lol tov aroparos 
Ibv pcerd (pOoyyov /ce'/cAr/rca \6y09. 

GEAI. 'AA^. 
15 HE. Kca pLrjv ev Xoyois avrb Xapev ov. 

GEAI. To ttolov ; 

HE. <t>daiv re kgll dir6<paaLv. 



4. Xa/37?f, t'i] avTa, which 

some editors insert between 
these two words, is omitted by 
the Bodleian, with most other 
MSS. 

6. Ai8ov juoW] The meta- 
phor implied in Ad/^s is con- 
tinued. 

7. Ovkovv — ravTov] Cf.Theast. 
189 e : to Se oiavoelcrdai dp' 
07Tfp eya> KaXels ', Tl KcikSiv ; Ao- 

yOVj OV aVTTj TTpOS ClVTTjV 7] ^V)(r) 

dief-epXeTcii 7rep\ a>v av aKonf/. 

In the present passage, as also 
in Phileb. 38 d, (in the ac- 
count of $6ga,) the distinction, 
as well as the likeness, between 
inward and outward language, 
is marked out. 

12. To 8e y 07J- 5 ineiprjs pevpa] 

Cf. Tkeset. 206 d : tt\v 86gav 

QK.TVTTOVjxeVOV (Is T7)V Sid TOV (TTO- 



[j.aTos por]v. Phileb. 1. c. : rd 

Te TTpos avTov pr/Liara evrelvas 
els (pcuvrjV Ttpbs tov napovra avra 
tout av irakiv (p8e'y$-at.TO, Knl 
Xdyos 8f] ylyovev ovtcos Tore 
86£av eKaXovpev. 

15. avTo] For airo, antici- 
pating the correlative word, 
though less distinctly than 
here, cf. Theset. 207 d : elra 

dpvrjpovels ev Trj tG>v ypapadrav 
fjiadrjcrei Kar dp^d? cravTov re Kal 
tovs aXXovs 8p£>VTas ai>Ta ; 0. 
'Kpa Xeyeis k.t.X. 2. TavTa 
Xeya. Herm. unnecessarily 
conj. owrot : Wagner av t68\ 
See also supr. 243 a, eKelvo, 
and 256 d, where the antece- 
dent of aurd had not been 
distinctly expressed ; and cf. 
Polit. 262 a: tovto ye — NE. To 



20<M2TH2. 



171) 



GEAI. "lafieu. 

aE. ' Otclv ovv tovto eV ^j/v)(fj Kara hiavoiav 
iyylyvrjTou /iera ariyrj?, irXip <^£'v ? ^X 6is> " TL 7r P 00 '' 
eiTrr)? avro ; 

GEAI. Kou irm ; 

SE. TV 5' oraz> /i?) /ca#' avryu dXXd Si alaOrj- 
aea>9 wapfj tlvl to tolovtov av irdOos, dp o\ov re 
6p9(DS ehrziv erepou n irXrjv (j)avTao~[av ; 

GEAI. OvUv. 

iS?E. Qvkovv tTreiTTep Xoyos dXrjOrjs 1 rjv kcu \j/ev- 
Sr]?, tovtcov & ifpavi] Sidvoia plv avrrjs irpos eavrrju 
ifsvXV? SiaXoyo9) Soija 8e Siavoia? dTroTeXevrrjcris, 
(f) a [vera i de b Aeyofxev avppu^Ls aio-6r)o~€a>? kcu 
86£r)9, dvdyKTj Srj kcu tovtcov tw Xoyco ^vyyevcav 

OVT(£>V \jf6vSr) T€ GtVTWV Q.VIO. KCU €VLOT€ HUGH. 

GEAI. Um V ov ; 

/HE. KcLTavoe'i? ovv otl wpoTepov evpeOr] ^€v8yj9 



io Thought 
then being 
mental self- 
colloquy, 
Opinion the 
completion 
of thought, 
and Ima- 
gining the 
meeting- 

15 point of 
Opinion 
and Sense, 
since 
speech may 



2. "Orav — avro] The passage 
of the Philebus just quoted is 
exactly parallel. 

6. pr) Kaff avrr]v~\ Sc. rfj ^\rvxfl. 

The distinction, here brought 
out underlies much of the later 
portion of the Thesetetus. The 
imagination of an absent ob- 
ject, which is omitted here, is 
described in Phileb. 38. 

7. ai>] This word is to be 
taken by an hyperbaton with 
the whole clause. 

Trddos] Cf. Theset. 193 d : 

to tt)s 86£r]s nd&os. 

11. tovtcov] Viz. the mental 
processes. 

12. So^a Se Siavolas dnoTe'hfv- 
Trjo-is] This is vividly expressed 
in the passage of the Theretetus 
above quoted, p. 1 90 a : bWav 



Se (J) ^fvxr]) oplcracra, e'lre /3paSu- 
Tepov, eire kcu o^VTepov eirat^acra, 
to avTO i[8r) (fir) Kal prj Sierra^, 
86£av TavTrjv Tideuev avrrj?. 

13. (paiveTai 8e 6 Xe'yopevJ 

" What we speak of as Imagin- 
ing." The same form of ex- 
pression occurs in Theset. 164 
b : to 8e ye ov% Spa ovk eViorornt 
eo~Tiv, e'nrep Kal to opa e7ri'crrarai. 

14. 7<5 Aoya) cvyyevatv ovtg>v~\ 

This has been shewn in the 
preceding sentences, airmu is 
pleonastic. It is probably im- 
plied that mere alo-flrjcris is nei- 
ther true nor false. 

15. -^revbrj elvai] This is 

shewn by an independent proof 
in the case of So'ga in the pas- 
sage of the Philebus above 
quoted (38 d). 



a a 2 



ISO 



IIAATON02 



be false, so 

also may 

these con- 

gl'IRTsVil" 

speech. 
The search 
for false- 
hood has 
ended 
sooner 
than we 
expected : 
and we 
may return 
with better 
courage to 
what re- 
mains of 
our origi- 
nal task. 



86{ja Kca Xoyo9 y kcito. ri)u irpoaSoKiav yv i(j)ol3i]- p. 264. 
Ot]\x(.v apri, firj TTavrdiraaiv u.vi']vvtov kpyov €7Ti(3aX- 
Xoi/ieOa Q-jTovvres clvto ; 
0EAI. Karafow. 

5 SE. Mr) TOIVVV /ITjS' €19 TO. XoLTTO. O.6vflC0fJL€V. 

eVetS?) yap 7re(f)aPTaL raura, rwv epirpoaOiv avapvy- c 
aOcopLev /car e'ldr) ^Latpiaecov. 

0EAI. UolcDv bfj ; 

HE. Aiei\6p.€0a Trj9 el8(oXo7rouK7Js eiSrj 8vo, rrjv 
10 p.lv eucaoTiic/jv, rr)v 8e (pavTao-Tucqv. 

0EAI. Nat. 

HE. Kai tov cro(f)LcrTr)u 6L7TOfi€V 0)9 airopoip.ev el9 
birorepav 6r)crofiev. 

6EAI. 3 H.v Tavra. 
15 HE. Kai roi>#' rj/JLcov a7ropov/JL€vcov eri fxeiQav 
K<x,T€)(V0r] aKOTo8ivia, (j)avevT09 tov Xoyov tov iraaiv 
afi<pLo-(3r)TOvi>T09 a>9 ovt€ eiKcov ovt€ ei8coXov OVT€ 
<pdvTaarp.a e'lr) to irapdirav ov8lv 8id to fxr)8apa>9 d 
p.7]8e7TOT€ p.r)8apiov -^£v8o9 eivai. 



1. r)v i<poj3qdr]ixev] This cog- 
nate accusative of the relative 
occurs several times in Plato, 
e.g. in Kep. 4, 434 e : vvv S' i<- 

TeXeacopev ttjv o~Ke\j/iv r)v wrjdrjptv, 
el — €7Tix el PW al l JLev Sedaaadai, paov 
av — KariSeu/. lb. 443 b : Te- 
Xeov apa rjplv to ivvirviov b e'cpapev 
viroTTTevcrai k.t.X. Legg. 2, 666 
b : 7rai8idv, tjv — tois dvdpoi7rois 
ibcoprjcraTo tov oivov (pdppanov. 

2. apTi] P. 261 a, b. 
c7n(3aX\oipe6a] " Were im- 
posing on ourselves." Cf. Tim. 

48 cl : 6>s 6p6a>s eVt^ejpot^' dv 
ToaoiiTOV eTTifiaXXopevos epyov. 
6. Tutv ep.Trpoo~8ev — 8iaipco~e<ov] 

The thread of argument is now 



completely resumed from supr. 
236. 

16. KaTexvOrj] Cf. Polit.302 C: 
tov vvv £TviK.()(yp.zvov Xoyov kclt 

dp X ds. Legg. 7, 793 b. The 
image here seems to be that 
of a cloud or mist. Compare 
Horn. II. Y. 321 : avTiKa to> pev 
eVeiTrt kcit 6(p6aXpa>v x* ev u%Xvv. 
lb. II. 344 : Kara 8' ScpOaXpcov 
k£)(vt dxXvs. 

<puvevTos] Cf. Theaet. 199 c : 

Beivorepov pevroi irddos dXXo napa- 
<fiaiveo~6ai pot 8oKe1. 

Trdo~iv\ Sc. toIs Xeyopevois. 
I. e. objecting equally to <pav- 
Tao-TLKrj, elKaoTTiKT], and el8coXo~ 
nouKrj. 



20<I>I2TH2. 



181 



64. 0EAI. Aeyei? oAjjfl}. 

£?E. Nvi> 8e y eireLdrj irtyavTai pcev Xoyo?, ttI- 
(pavTOLL 5' ovaa 8o£a \j/ev8ij9, iyx<x>P*L &) fUfJLTjfJiaTa 
twv ovTUiV eivai koll riyvi-jv e'/c ravTTjS yiyveaOai tyjs 
8ia0€(T€co9 airaTrjTUcqv. 5 

0EAI. 'EyxcopeL 

S*E. Kal jjlt}v on y r\v 6 o~o([)i(rT7]S tovtwv tto- 
repov, SicofJLo\oyr)/uLei>ov rjfxiv iv tols irpoaOev rjv. 

0EAI. Not. 
e 3?E. ITaA^ tolvvv liTL-)(eLpu>ixev, ayjitpvTes 8i)(f} to io 
irporeOev yevos, iropemcrOaL Kara tovtu Sefya del 
fxepos rov TjirjOevTO?, e^ofxevot tt}? tov ao^iarov 
KOivcovias, ecoy av avrov ra kolvol iravra Trepitkovres, 
rr]v OLKtiav XmovTes (f)vcriu eVtSe/^co/uei/ fidXicrTa plv 
p. 265. rjfXLV avrols; eireiTa Se /cat tow eyyvTarco yevet rrj? 15 
TOLavrrjs fxeOoSov TretyvKocriv. 

0EAI. 'Opdfc. 



Conch/r 
sion of I. 
After dis- 
tinguishing 
likeness- 
making 
into ini.-i'ji 
making 
and phan- 
tastic, we 
doubted in 
which com- 
partment 
to place the 
Sophist, 
when there 
arose the 
more im- 
portant 
doubt, 
which we 
have just 
resolved. 



4. ravTT]s ttJs SiaBe&ecos] Sc. 
<irev8ovs 86£t]s. 

I J. tovtcdv ivore pov\ " One 01' 

other of these two things." 
Either eifcao-riKd? or (pavracmKos. 

io. nakiv toiwv] "Let us 
therefore go to work again, 
and dividing in half each kind 
that is set before us, advance, 
taking always the right side 
of that which has been bisected 
last, and clinging fast to that 
which holds the Sophist, until, 
having peeled off all that is 
common to him with others, 
we leave only his proper na- 
ture, and declare this, first and 
chiefly to ourselves, but also to 
those besides whose genius is 
most near of kin to this sort 
of method." For Kara tovttI 
begia, cf. Plisedr. 266 a : axrnfp 



Se (rafiaros e§ evos 6WA2 kci\ 
6p.a>vvpa ne(pvKe, ra p.ev (TKaid, ra 
8e 8e£ia Kkrjdivra k.t.X. 

12. ixofxcvoi — noivavias\ I.e. 

Making the participation of 
the Sophist in each kind our 
test and clue. The notion of 
Koivaula, when once established, 
is well used. Cf. Theaet. 209 c, 
[xvrine'iov, and note. 

15. to7s eyyvrdra) y£vei\ Cf. 
Soph. Ant. 174 : yevovs kcit dy- 
XUTreia : and for the meaning, 
Pluedr. 266 b : tovtcov — av- 
T0£ re epaarTjs — twv Suiipecrectv 
Kal crvvayayav — idv re tiv ciKKov 
rjyrjO-wpai Svvarov ets ev Kal em 
ttoXXci TreCpvKos opqv, tovtov diaxoy 
KaTo-rncrOe p.er' 'l^viov ware 6eo1o. 
For e7J-tSet£a>/nei>, cf. Slipr. 235 C 

(where the same thing is spoken 
of) : dTrocprjvat n)v aypav. 



182 



nAATONOS 



We are 

11. iw at li- 
berty to 
continue 
our series 
of divisions, 
which be- 
gan with 
the distinc- 
tion of cre- 
ative and 
acquisitive 
art. Our 
previous 
definitions 
were ob- 
tained by 
following 
the sections 
of acquisi- 
tive art. 
But as he 
now ap- 
pears as an 
imitator, 
we must 
divide crea- : 
tive art, of 
which the 
making of 
imitations 
is obviously 
a branch. 



mE. Ovkovv tut€ fieis r)p^opaOa 7TQL^tlk^u kill p 
KT)]TiKr)i> T€)(i>7]u Siaipovpevoi ; 
0EAI. kw. 
HE. Koci ttjs KTrjTiKrj? Iv 6i)pevTiKfj KCii uycovia 

5KCU ifXTTOpLKYj Kal TLCTIV Iv T0L0VT019 U§€CTLV e(f)aVTU- 

(etf rjixiv ; 

GEAI. Haw pev ovv. 

HE. Nw 8e y iiretdr) papLrjTiKr) ire pie tXrjfev avTov 
re\vrj, SrjXov a>? avTrjv tt)v 7ron]TLKr)v oV^a SiatpeTtuv 
io7rpcoTi]v. 7] yap irov fAifirjcrL? 7rolr)<TL$ r/? io~Tiv, h 
elScoXcov pevTOL, (J)apLev, dXX ovk avTcov eKaarcou. i) 
yap; 

GEAI. Ylavrairaai p,ev ovv. 

HE. UoiT]TlKrJ9 St) TTpCOTOV SvO edTCO pL€pTJ. 

'5 0EAI. Uolco; 

HE. To pev 6eiov, to ft avOpcoTuvov. 

GEAI. Outtu) p.epadr]Ka. 

HE. Uoir]TLK7]v, eiirep p.ep.vr)pe6a tcl KaT ap^as 
XzyOevTa, iraaav kdjyapev elvai SvvapLiv, r\ tis av aWta 
yiyvr]Tai toIs pur] irpoTepov ovatv vaTtpov yiyveadai. 

GEAI. MepLV7]pLe6a. 

HE. Zcoa 8rj iravTa 6vf)Ta Kal (f)VTa, 6o~a r iiri c 
yrjs €K cnreppLaTOdv Ka\ pt^cov (f)v€Tai Ka\ oora a^rvya 



265. 



1. Tjpxoixeda — Simp.] "We be- 
gan by dividing." 

5. e(pavTa£e8' fjfiiv] Sic Bodl. 

" We bad glimpses of hirn." 

C). SijAoi/ Q)S aVTTjV TTjV 7TOITJTL- 

ktjv] "The very art of mak- 
ing," of wbicb image-making 
is a part. We bave bere an 
example of tbe mental initia- 
tive by wbicb the one idea is 
found wbicb is afterwards divi- 
ded, according to Pbileb. 1 6 c. 



1 1 . avTwv eKacrrcoi/] That this 

phrase is vernacular and not 
technical appears from Aesch. 
Prom. 952 : aXX' aid' ckcwtt £k- 
4>pd(e. Compare also Aristotle's 

avdeKaa-roi tls. Etb. N. IV. 7, § 4. 

18. kot dpxas] P. 219b: nav 
onep av p.rj irporepov tls oi> varepov 
els ovalav ayrj. 

2 2. (pvra,o(TaT — citt]Ktci] The 

notion of <pvra is expanded by 
an afterthought. 



2(M>I2TH2. 



183 



p. 265. ev yfj tjvplcrTaTca acofiara ttjktol kcu arrjKra, ptcov 
aXXov tlvos i] 6eov SrjpuovpyovvTOs d>7}(T0fi€v varepop 
yiypeaOcu irporepop ovk ovtcc ; i) tu> tcdp ttoXXcov 
Boy pan kcu piyxart \pchp.epoL ; 

9EAI. Uolcp; 

iH'E. Ttp Ttiv (j)vcnv aura, yeppqv caro tlpos air Las 
auTopdrys kcu avev diapolas (frvovcrrjs' ?) perd Xoyov 
re kcu iTrMTTrjpLrp? Qeias diro Qeov yiypopLeprjs ; 
d 0EAI. 'Kya> uep lacos did tt]P yXiKiap ttoXXukls 
dpLffcorepa pLeraSofjatfi)' vvv p.i]v fiXerroop els ere kcu 
viroXapfidpcop dieaOal ere Kara ye 6ehv aura ylyve- 
aOai, Tavrrj kcu avros vevopuKa. 

£E. KaXcos ye, d> QealrrjTe. kcu el pep ye ere 
rjyovixeOa tcov els top eTretra \povop dXXcos ttcos 
So^a^oprcop elpca, vvv c\p tcd Xoyco pterd TreiOovs 
apayKaias eireyeipovpev iroielp opcoXoyeip' eirei^r] Se' 
aov KarapapOdpco tt)p (pvenp, on kcu avev twp Trap 
e iiawv Xoycop avrrj irpoaeicrip i(j) direp vvv eXKecrOcu 



Creative 
art is, 1st, 
divine and 
human. 
For i" ( rod, 
working by 
reason, run! 
not l" ;uiy 
mere spon- 
taneity of 
nature, is 
to be re- 
ferred the 
origin of 
animals, 
vegetables 
and mine- 
rals. 



Thesetetus, 
although 

young, is 
inclined to 
this opin- 
ion, and 
the Stran- 
ger, consi- 
dering the 
nobility of 
his nature, 



I. rrjKra kol arrjKTa] I.e. Me- 
tals and other minerals. 

4. ypw/xei/oi ] Sc. (p7](ronev 
yiyveadai. 

The following passage con- 
tains the same religious spirit 
which is more fully expressed 
in the Tirnreus and in the 10th 
book of the Laws ; cf. esp. 
Legg. 10, 889-892. Also Phi- 
leb. 28 d, e. 

I I. Kara ye 6eov] " At least in 
accordance with the nature of 
God." 

13. Kcikcos ye, a> Qeairijre.] 
With similar warmth in Theset. 
185 e there is welcomed the 
assertion of the independent 
activity of the mind : KaA6s 

yap el, &> 6., — 6 yap KaXcos \eyoov, 



KaXos re KayaQos. 

15. So%a£6vT(ov\ "Of that class 
of persons who in later life 
think otherwise." The present 
participle has almost become a 
noun, and has lost the tempo- 
ral meaning. 

fiera TreiBovs dvayKaias] This 

" demonstrative persuasion " 
is advanced in the 10th book 
of the Laws, where it is 
shewn that Mind is prior to 
the elements of Nature, and 
that the best mind rules. Cf. 
esp. pp. 888 e sqq., 891 c, 
892 b, 896 c, 897 c. See also 
ib. 12, 967 c. Tim. 46 e. 

Treidovs di'ayKaias] " The per- 
suasion of demonstration." 



184 



nAATONOS 



thinks it 
unneces- 
sary, by 
further 

argument, 
to antici- 
pate the 

rll'i-rl of 

time. 



But, andly, 
divine and 
human art 
are each 
divided 
into an art 
of making 
realities 
and an art 
of likeness- 
making. 



027$*, iucrco' xpovos yap e/c irepiTTov yiyvour av. p. 
a A Act Oijaco to. fxlv (fwaei Xeyo/xeva TroieladaL 6 da 
T ^X V V'> 7 "**»^' 6 ' K tovtcov vtt di't9pco7ra>v ^vviaTa/xeva 
dvdpco7rlvr], /cat Kara tovtov 8i) tov Xoyov 8vo ttoltj- 
5 tlki~is ytvr\, to p.ev avOpamLvov elvai, to 8e Qeiov. 

9EAI. *Op0m. 

SE. Te/xve 8rj 8vo1v ovaaiv 8'iya eKaTepav avOts. 

0EAI. nc5y; 

aE. Olov tot€ fiev /cara 7rAaro? Tep.va)v tijv ttol- p. 
iorjTLKT]u Traaav, vvv 8e av /cara firJK09. 

6EAI. TeTfiycrOco. 

££E. TeTTapa fxrjv avTrjs ovtco to. irdvTa fie'pr) 
ylyveTai, 8vo fiev tol irpos rjfJLwv, dvOpumeia, 8vo 8' 
av to. irpbs Oecov, 0eia. 
is 9EAI. Nat. 

HE. Ta 8e y co? kripoa'S av 8ir\py}p.£va, fiepos fiev 

ev d(f) eKaTepa? Trj? pLepi8o9 avTOTroimLKov, tco 8* 

vttoXoittcq o~)(e8bv fiaXiaT av XeyoiaOrjv el8a>Xo- 

7rouKco. K.a\ Kara Tama 8y] ttolXlv r/ 7roir]TiKr) 8l)(tj 

20 SiaipeiTou. 

0EAI. A eye otttj eKaTepa o.v6l$. b 



1. XP° V0S y^p e ' K irepiTTov yi- 
yvoir av] " For to do other- 
wise would be to supersede 
the work of Time." 

2. ra. — Cpvcrei] Either cpvcrei 

has almost the force of au adj., 
as in Rep. 6, 501 b (to cpvcrei 
Sinaiov k.t.X.) ; and Xeyopeva is 
added pleonastically, like the 
participle in heivor^res Sokov- 
<tu, Theret. 176 d : or, per- 
haps better, the infinitive noi- 
ela-dm is to be repeated with 

Xeyopeva. 

9. Kara ttXcitos — Kara p-r/KOs] 



Compare Phsedr. 266 a, already 
quoted. 

13. 7rpos fjpav — irpos Beau] 

" On our side, on the side of 
the Gods." 

1 6. Ta 8e y cos erepcos] " Then 

as to the divisions which were 
made in the other way." &>? 
is pleonastic, as in <a? dXrjdcbs. 

17. avroiroiTjTiKop] The art of 
making the things themselves. 

21. Aeye — av6n] "Tell me 
once more how each (ttoitjtikti 
deia, avBpanlvq) is divided (8iai- 
peirai).' 



2CXM2TH2. 



185 



p. 266. HE. 'Huei? uev 7T0V kcu rdXXa ^coa Kal e{j cov to. 

7T€(f)VK0T e(TTl, TTVp KCU vdcop KCU TCt TOVTCOV u8eX(jja, 

Oeov yevvrjpara Travra Xafiev aura aireipyaaueva 
€Ka(TTa' r) irm ; 

0EAI. Ovrm. 5 

HE. Tovtoov 8e ye eKctarcov et'<5coAa, aAA' ovk 
aura, 7rap67T€Tai, Baifiovia kcu ravra u-qyavfi yeyo- 
vora. 

0EAI. Uola; 

HE. Tec re ev rots* vttvols kcu ocra u€0' rjuepav 10 
(pavTaauaTa avro(pvrj Xeyerai, ctklol fxev otcw ev rco 
c TTvpi (tkoto? eyyiyvrjrai, 8l7tXovv 8e yjvlk av (j)a>s,- 
OLKtlov re kcu aXXorpiov 7repl tol Xauirpa kcu Xela eh 



Divinely 
made like- 
nesses are, 
for in- 
stance, 
thosewhich 
appear in 



i. e| av ra] The same use 
of the article occurs in a simi- 
lar connexion in Protag. 320 c: 
Kai t&v oaa nvpl Kal yjj nepdv- 
WTai. 

3. avra eicaora] Ut Supra : 

opposed to eKaarav e'i8co\a 
infra. 

7. TrapeTrerai — infr. C, irapa- 
ko\ov6ovv\ So irapaKokovQel in 
Theset. 158 c, of dreams an- 
swering to realities. 

1 1 . cpavrda-para avTO(pvrj\ Na- 
tural images, opposed to arti- 
ficial ones, such as those of 
the painter. 

o-Kia pev — 8nr\ovv 6V] The 
latter word is not forthcoming 
in Rep. 6, 510 a : Aeyw 6V rds 
elKovas 7fpa>TOp pev to? (TKids, 
eireira ra iv toi? v8a<ri (pavrd- 
apara Kal iv roiy ova irvKvd re 
Kal Xela Kal (pavd o-vveo~Tr]Ke. For 

other observations on optical 
reflexion, cf. Theaet. 193 c, Tim. 

43- 

1 2. The words (pas oueelov Kal 



aWorpiov — els ev o-vve\66v ("the 
light belonging to things bright 
and smooth meeting in one 
upon their surface with the 
light from another object") 
may be illustrated by compar- 
ing Tim. 46 a : eK yap rrjs eKTOs 
evros re rov nvpos eKarepov koiv<o- 
vias, evos re av irepl ttjv XeiorrjTa 
eKao-Tore yevopevov. Objects 

which give a perfect reflection, 
such as smooth water, polished 
metal, &c, were supposed to 
have in them a luminous prin- 
ciple which met on the smooth 
surface with the light from the 
reflected object, just as the fire 
in the eye encountered the ex- 
ternal fire in the act of vision. 
It appears from the same pas- 
sage compared with Theret. I.e., 
that the words ttjs epnpoaSev 
ela>6vias o\j/ea>s ivavr'iav a'io~dr)o~iv 

refer to the transposition of 
right and left in the reflected 
irnace. 



B b 



18() 



nAATONOS 



mid, in tin' 
day-time, 

sIiuiImV. -i 

and reflec- 
tions. 



And, as a 
house is a 
humanly- 
made real- 
ity, so the 
picture of 
a house is 
a sort of 
humanly- 
created 
waking 
dream. 



ev £vi>e\0oi> Tr/<? tpirpoaOev dcoOvla? uyj/eoo? ivavTiav p. 266 
alaOrjaii/ 7rap6)(ov €180? airzpyaijqiai. 

GEAI. Avo yap ovv earl raura Oela? epya 
7ron']iT€co?, avro re kou to irapaitoXovOovv eiBooXov 
5 eKaarco. 

HE. TV Se rr)v i-jixerepav rey^vqv ; up ovk avrrju 
fiev oiKiav oiKoSo/JLiKf) (jy-qaopev irotelv, ypcMpiKrj 8e 
riv eWepav, olov ovap avBpwiTLvov eyprjyopocnv aireip- 
yacrpevrjv ; 
o GEAI. Yldvv p.ev ovv. d 

HE. Ovkovv Kail TaXXa ovrco /caret Svo currct epya 
ttjs rj/merepa? av 7rotr)TiKr]$ Trpdijecos, to /lev avTO, 
(pa/me'v, avTOvpyiKr], to Se etdcoXov elSutXoTrouKr) . 

GEAI. Nvv /JLaXXov e/xadov, /cat tlOyj/jll Bvo Bixfj 
iS7TOL7]TiKrJ9 eiSr/' -fOela-f plv /cat •\dv0pco7TLV7]j' koto. 
Oarepov TpLrjpa, /cara <5e OaWepov to pev avTcou bv, to 
8e 6/JLOioo/JiaT(oi> Tivwv yevvrjp.a. 



6. rjpeTepav] I. e. avOpasTvivqv. 

(prja-onev is to be. supplied from 
what follows. 

avTTjv — oIkiciv~\ " A real 
house." Not the ideal house, 
as in Eep. 10, 597 e : airrjv — 

6 ear 1 KXlvrj. 

8. ovap a.v6p£mivov~\ I. e. As 
dreams are a kind of divine 
pictures, so a picture may be 
described as a human dream. 

eyprjyopoo-iv] " For those who 
are awake." 

11. Kara Suo] Like Kad' ev, 

Kar okiyov. " By twos." " In 
pairs." Cf. Theset. 156 b. 

12. to — avro] "The thing 
itself." The grammar seems to 

require avTovpyinrjs eldcoXoTroi- 

iKrjs. But there may be a 
change of construction from 
epya. (ecrrt) rrjs ttoit]tik)]S to av- 



rovpyiKr] (eVrt 7Tot.ovo-a) to aiJTO. 
Compare the transition imme- 
diately below, from ^01777-4*07 to 
yswrjpa, from the art to the 
work. 

14. 860 5t^»] "Two in two 
ways :" i.e. («) divine, human ; 
(b) reality, shadow. 

1 5- T#ei'aT pev Ka\ fdvdpco7riVT] f] 
Probably Qeiav p. k. av&puiiivr]i>, 
as Heincl. observes. 

16. avT&v] " Of things them- 
selves." Although the fourfold 
division, in Kep. 6 sub fin., 
of the intelligible and visible is 
different and has a different 
object, it is prompted by a 
fancy very similar to that 
which rules in the present 
passage. 

1 7. yewrjpa] For this use of 
the neuter word where the 



2CMI2TH2. 



187 



Next fol- 
lows the 
distinction 
which was 
before pro 
vieionally 
made, be- 
tween 
5 Imaee- 



a real :uid 
an appa- 
rent like- 



p. 266. aE. Trjs tolvvv elSooXovpyucrjs dva/j.vt]aOcofJLev bri 
to fxev eiKaariKOv, to 8e <pavTao~TUCov efxeXXev eivai 
e yevos, el to \J/ev8o? ovtcos ov ^/ev8o9 /cat tcov ovtcov 
ev tl (fraveirj 7re(f)v /coy. 
0EAI. 'H^ yap ovv. 
3?E. Ovkovv €(f)dvr] re /ecu 8id Tama 8rj KaTapi- jJndpfan- 

/\ ' > \ -. > 1 n r ''£>£' tastic ; the 

UfXTjaofiev avTco vvv avapL(J)to-pi]Tr)Tcos eio?; duo ; creation of 

GEAI. No/. 
-). 2,6j. 3?E. To tolvvv (j)avTaorTiKov 
8t X a. 

GEAI. Ufj; 

£*E. To /xei/ 6Y opydvcov yiyvofjtevov, to 8e avTov ^^ ded - 
irape^ovTOs iavTov opyavov tov ttoiqvvtos to <fidv- ki n di3 

Taaaa. unpersons 

' tion or 

GEAI. fid)? 0rj?; 15 mimicry. 

SE. r 'QTav, oIjjloi, to aov o-yrjfxa tis tco iavTov 
Xpcop-evos acofiaTt TrpoaopLOiov y (f)covi)v (ficovfj (f)a(v€- 
o~6ai 7roif}, fiifxrjaLS 1 tovto tyjs (pavTao-TiKijs /xaAio-Ta 
KeK\r)Tai irov. 

GEAI. No/. 

3?E. M.lJJLY)TlKOV 8r] TOVTO aVTTj? TrpocrenrovTes diro- 



av*0LS dtoplQo/xev negsofa 

tiling. Of 

10 these.plian- 

tastic may 

be acain 



feminine was ratlier to be ex- 
pected, cf. infr. 267 c, /-"'/x^a, 
Polit. 289 b, Opepfia. As the 
act sometimes becomes the ob- 
ject of the verb (in the con- 
straction known . as cognate 
accusative), so the noun ex- 
pressive of the object is some- 
times put for the act. See 
General Introduction. 

2. epeXkev] P. 236 d, e. 
7. avT(o\ Sc. eincKTTiKri Kal 
<fiavTa(TTLKr]. 

16. "Orav — ttov] In this sen- 
tence TTpoaojioiov (palveadcu iroifj 



is equivalent to dcpofioicorai. : 

cf. (paiveaOai Troieiv below. 

" When any one represents or 
nearly represents your appear- 
ance by means of his own 
body, or your voice by his 
voice, imitation is the name 
for this branch of the phan- 
tastic art." 

17. <fia>vfj] Governed by xpw- 
fievos. 

2 I . aTvoveifiaii(6a\ " Part off 
for our own share." Cf. Phsedr. 
266 b, refivofxevos. 



E b 2 



188 IIAAT0N02 

veipwpeOa' to <$' aXXo nav d(jjaip.€v /xaXaKiaOevTes p. 267. ,; 
kcu 7rapei>Te? tTe'pcp avvayayelv re els ev Kai irpeirov- » 
crav e7ra>i>v/j.iav diro8ovvai tiv avTcp. 

0EAI. NevepyaOoo, to 8e peOeiaOco. 
5 SE. Kai firjv kcu. rovro eri 8iirXovv, co QeaiTrjTe, 
d^iov -qyelcrOai' 81 a 8e, o-KOirei. 

0EAI. Aeye. 

Mimicry is £££. T<W pupOVpevOOV Oi [llv el8oTeS O jXLfXOVVTai 

sometimes 

with know- TOUTO TTpOLTTOVCTLV, 01 8' OVK €l8oT69. KCU TOL TLVCL 

sometimes 10 peifco 8iaipeo-iv dyvcoarias re kcCl yvcocrecos 6t}- 

without. 

aofiev ; 

0EAI. OvSefiiav. 

HE. Ovkovv to ye dpTL XeyOev e\8oTUiV rjv p.1- 
pLrj/uLa. to yap crop o~xf)fia kcu ae yiyvcocrKcov dv tls 

*Sfll/JLrjO-CUTO. 

0EAI. Um 8' ov ; c 

SE. T7 8e 8iKcaoo-vvri$ to o-^fta /cai oXrjg fvA- 

Xy(38rju dpeTrj? ; a/)' ouk ayyooLJi/res yueV, 8o^dtpvTe$ 

8e 7rr), cr<p68pa eTn^eipovat iroXXoX to 8okovv a(picri 

iotovto toy eVcw avTOis irpoOvp-elaOaL (paivecrOai ttoluv, 

o tl p.aXio~Ta epyois re kcu Xoyois [xip.ovp.evoi ; 

0EAI. Kai Trdvv ye iroXXoi 

There are £?E. McoV OW TTOLVTeS CmOTVyYOiVOVO'L TOV 8oKeLV 

those, for ' A 

i. /xaXaKio-^eVTes] " Shrink- it not notorious that many, 

ing from further effort." Cf. who have no knowledge but 

supr. 241 c : anoarrja-oixeBa vvv an opinion of some kind about 

nakdaKicrdivTes ; these things, use all their might 

9. 7-oOro npaTTovaiv] Sc. to make it appear that they 

fiifiovvrai. have in them that which an- 

13. piprjpa] The result is swers to their own opinion, 

again substituted for the act, impersonating this in actions 

as in ye'wTjfxa supra 267 a. and words as far as they can V 

17. to axwu] Governed by /it- Cf. Rep. 2, 365 c : npoQvpa piv 
povvrat implied in what follows. Kai (rx^pa kvk\<o irep\ ipavrbv 

1 8. ap ovk — pip.ovp.evoi ;] "Is aKiaypcKplav dpeTrjs TrepiypanTeov. 



scnmsths. 



189 



367. di>ai Bikcliol pLrjBapLcos bvTes ; r) tovtov ttolv tov- 
volvtlov ; 

geai. mv. 

cl S*E. M.ifjL7)Tr)v Br) tovtov ye eTepov eKelvov XeKTeov 

olfJLOLl, TOV ayVOOVVTOL TOV ytyVCDO-KOVTOS. \ 

0EAI. Nat. 

SE. Ylodev ovv ovopta i/carepcD T19 clvtcov XtyeTai 
irpeirov ; r) BtjXov By yaXeirbv ov, Blotl ttjs twv 
yevcov kolt etBrj Biaipecrecos iraXaia 77?, a>? eoiKev, 



instance, 
who per- 
sonate their 
own notion 

of justice, 

without 

knowing 

what jus- 
tice really 
is. For 
this branch 
of mimicry, 
through 
the remiss- 
ness of the 
first name- 
givers, it is 



>/~v /1 \>/ «■» a o,» difficult 

cuTia tol9 epnrpoauev Kan acrvvvovs 7raprju, coaTe ptrjo 10 10 find a 
hriyeipeiv prjBeva BicupelcrOaL' kclOo Br) tcov ovopLaTcov "Motion 
avayKX] \xr) o~(j)6Bpa eviropelv. opicos Be, kclv el ToXprj- "i'^S 
poTepov elprjaOat, diayvcoo-eco? evena tt)v p.ev pteTa ^a^Ti 
e B6£r)? pLiprjcriv Bo£opLipLr)TiKr)v 7rpocreL7ra>pLev, Tr)v Be j^eitiiei 

pLeT eTTLO-TrjpLr]? \cTTOplKr]V TIVCL pLlpLrjaiV. ^whenTh 

GEAI. "Eo-TCO. mimic is 

unconsci 

5?E. QaTepCp TOLVVV XPy°" r * 0V ' ° 7<Zp O-0(f>lOTr)S pus of hi 

OVK e.V TOl? elBoaLV f)v, dXX eV TOW pLipLOVpLe- ordissei 

VOLS Br). thedisse 

bling no 
0EAI. K.GU piaXa. 20 tion-min 



i. nr]8aiia>s ovrei] An under- 
current of strong feeling is per- 
ceptible here and in o-obodpa 
supra, as in Kep. 7, 531 e : ov 
yap ttov doKovai aoi oi ravra teivol 
BiaXeKTiKol eivai. Ov p.a tov At", 
e<prj, el pfj p.d\a ye rives oXiyoi ois 
eyco evTervxqKa. 

9. irakaia — iraprjv] Ancient, 
and therefore hard to discover 
— void of reflection, or com- 
prehensive thought, and there- 
fore without principles. Com- 
pare Bacon's complaint of the 
vagueness of common language 



about physical qualities. 

IO. davvvovs] Cf. Legg. 7, 
799 e : Kadcnrep oi naXaiol Tore 
7rep\ Kidapmdiav ovtco ttcos, cos eoi- 
Kev, covopLacrav, coo~Te Tax av ovo ^ 
inelvoL Travraivao-i y dcpecrrcoTes 
elev tov vvv \eyop.evov, nad' vttvov 
8e oiov Ttov tls r) ko\ vnap eyprj- 
yopcos coveipco^e p.avTevop.evos avro. 

1 8. ovk iv toIs eldocjiv fjv\ P. 

233 d. 

dXX' iv — Br)] " But he does 
appear amongst the class of 
imitators." 



190 



IIAATQNOS 



dissembles 
before a 
multitude ; 
the other, 
which 
makes a 
False im- 
pression Oil 
individuals 
by means 
of Eristic 
argument : 
in other 
words, 
the clap- 
trap orator, 
and — the 
Sophist : 



alS)]pov, e'/re vynjs elre diTrXorjv £'t t\wv Tiva Iutiv p. 26; 
ev iavrco. 

0EAI. 2/co7rw/xez/. 

SE. "^X €L T0LVVV KaL P-dXa GvyyrjV. 6 fxev yap 
5€vr)0r)s clvtwv icrTiv, olofievo? eidevai ravra a do^d^EL' p. 26^ 
to 8e Oarepov o~)(r]jjLa 8lo. ttjv Iv T0I9 Xoyois kvXlv- 
8r]o-ii> e'x<Ei ttoXXtjv v7ro\j/lav koll (pofiov a>9 dyvoei 
Tavra a 7rpo? tov? aXXovs (hs eidoo? icrx^fiaTiaTaL. 

GEAI. Yldvv fj.€v ovv ecmv tKarepov yevovs d>v 
10 tiprjKas. 

HE. Ovkovv tov pt.lv dirXovv fUfirjTTjv Tiva, tov 8e 
elpcoviKOv pLLfirjTrjv Orjaofxev ; 

GEAI. Et/coy yovv. 

SE. Tovrov 5' av to ykvos ev y dvo (f)a!)fxev ; 
15 GEAI. "Opa av. 

HE. 2/co7rco, /cat jjlol SiTTGo KaTa(paivea06v Tive' b 
tov fxev 8rj/ioaia re kcu piaKpoh Xoyois irpos irXrjOr) 
dvvaTOV elpcoveveaOai KaOopco, tov Se ioia re, koll 



1. e'lre SwrXoV ] Various 
figures are employed to give 
greater vividness to the notion 
of division. Cf. supr. 229 b. 

Polit. 259 d : av apa iv avrrj 
Tiva 8ia(pvrjv KaTavorjO'aip.ev. lb. 

260 : Oeareov e'l tttj SiecrTrjKe. lb. 

261 : e'l Tiva TOfirjv en e\op.ev vtt- 
eluovarav iv tovtco. Phsedr. 268a: 
el apa kol crot (paiverai 8ieo~TT)Kos 
avTuv to r/Tpiov &o~nep epoi. 

5. avrcov] t<ov do^ofiip.r]Ta)P. 

6. to 8e Qmepov o-^ripa — io'X 1 !' 

p,a.Tio-Tai\ " But it is part of 
the form in which the other 
appears that from the constant 
practice of discussion he cannot 
but suspect and fear that he 
is ignorant of the things which 



he wears the appearance before 
other men of knowing." " There 
is in his attitude an unmis- 
takeable air of misgiving and 
fear." 

KvXiv8rjo-iv] Cf. Theset. 172 c: 

01 iv tiKao-TTjpiois Kal toIs toiov- 
tois eK veav Kv\iv8ovp,evoi. 

9. i'o-Tiv — eip^Kas] "There 
certainly is a character belong- 
ing to each of the two kinds 
you have described." Or 6 

dogopip,. ecrriv eKaTepov yevovs. 

12. elpaviKov] " Hollow, in- 
sincere, designing." elpapinos 
occurs again (and again in a 
bad sense) in Legg. io, 908 e. 

18. 18 ia re] Sc. elpaveveadai 



20M2TH2. 



191 



\68.fipa)(€(ri Xoyois dvayKa^ovra rov TrpoaBiaXtyopLtvov 
evavrioXoye'iv avrov avrcp. 

0EAI. Aeyeis opOorara. 

SE. Tlva ovv a7ro(Pau>co/jL€0a rov fiaKpoXoycorepov 
elvaL ; irorepa woXltikov rj drj/xoXoytKov ; 5 

0EAI. Ayp.oAoyLK.6v. 

SE, T/ Se rov erepov epovjuev ; ao(f)ov ?} ao(f)i- 

(TTIKOV ; 

0EAI. *To* /xeV 7T0i» <ro(pou dSvvarov, iTreiirep ovk 
c ei^ora avrov edep,€v' pupi-qrys 5' <bj; roi5 crocpov SrjXov io 
OTi 7rapa>vvpLiov avrov ri Xr]\j/erai, kou a)(e8ov rjdr) 
fi€/j.dd7]Ka on rovrov Be? irpocremfiv aXr)6m avrov 
e\e?vov rov iravrairacnv ovrws aotyicrrriv. 

3E. Ovkovv avvdrjaofiev avrov, KaOdirep epnrpo- 
crOev, rovvofia o-vfMrXe^avres 1 diro reAevrrj? eV'15 
dpxqv ; 



2. ivavTioXoyelv] It now ap- 
pears how much of the claim 
advanced in p. 231 a is granted 
to the Sophist. He is allowed 
to possess that portion of the 
Eristic art which is not based 
on knowledge, but on the prac- 
tice of argument. Cf. also 
p. 225 d, e. 

9, *T6*] MSS. t6v. Ste- 
phanus, followed by the other 
editors, corrected this into to, 
with great probability. 

11. TrapuvvfiLov] The vague- 
ness of this derivation renders 
it more correct than Hegel's 
from the imaginary o-oQifriv, 
" to make wise," or Bentham's, 
who took o-o^icrrTjj for a super- 
lative. 

12. [iefj.a6r]Ka\ " I now clearly 
understand that this is he whom 
I must address as the very man 



of whom we are in search, the 
unmistakeably real and genuine 
Sophist." 

avrbv eReivov] There is 
again a transition from the 
name to the thing. 

14. KaQairep epTrpoo-Qev] P. 226 
a. For dirb TeXevrrjs ilf dp^rjv, 

cf. Legg. 1, 768 e: ttjv d.p^y]v 

vvv reAevrfl Trpoaafyas. 

By the process of division 
the Sophist is thrust down into 
the lowest sphere of imitative 
(i. e. unreal) art, much in the 
same way in which pleasure 
finds the lowest place in the 
Philebus ; and poetry, in Rep. 
10, is thrice removed from 
truth (597 e), where there is 
also the same division of di- 
vine and human art. So the 
actual Politicians are found 
low down amongst the class of 



192 



nAATONOS 20<M2TH2. 



genealogy 
is now 
complete. 



0EAI. Ylavv ph ovv. P- 26S. 

SE. Tov 81] rrjs evavTioTroioXoytKrj? eiptoviKOv 
fiepovs rrj9 8o$jao-TiKrj? fiifirjTiKov, tov tyavTacrTiKov 
yevovs airo Trj? €i8(oXo7rouKr)? ov Oelov aXK avOpco- d 
5 7riKov rrj9 iroir)(T6(x)s ucfxopia/ievov iv Xoyots to 6av- 

fXaTOTTOUKOV /JLOpLOV, TCtVTr)? TYjS ytveOLS T€ KCU CCl/JLaTO? 

oy av <Pfi tov ovtco? ao(f)io-Tr]i> uvea, TaXr)OeaTaTa, wy 
eoiKev, epei. 

0EAI. YlavTOLTracrL /xev ovv. 



servants (Polit. 289 d), and in 
the series of transmigrations 
given in the Phsedrus, 248 e, 
the eighth place (between the 
artificer and the tyrant) is as- 
signed to the life of the So- 
phist or the public man. 

2. T6i> 8rj] I have ven- 
tured to retain top against 
Schleierniacher, who reads to, 
and to give dcpapio-pevov a 
middle signification. " The 
artist of the contradiction-caus- 
ing, conscious section of un- 
knowing mimicry, who has 
taken for his own the word- 
juggling portion of human, not 
divine, creation, in the phan- 
tastic species of likeness-mak- 
ing, such undeniably is the 
lineage of the true Sophist." 

Cf. SUpr. 267 b, dnoveipapeda. 



4. dvdpamiKov, though hardly 
occurring elsewhere in Plato, 
may be regarded as probably 
genuine, because of the affec- 
tation of variety and novelty 
of diction which pervades the 
dialogue. 

5. The Bodl. MS. has Bavpa- 

fTTOTroirjubv, not 8avp.aT0TV0irjTi.KbVj 

as Gaisford asserts. 

6. TavTTjs ttjs — at/xaros] The 
words of Glaucus. II. Z. 211 : 

tovttjs toi yeverjs Te Ka\ atparos 

evxopai eivai. The derivation 
of kind from kind by 8taipeo-is 
is compared to a genealogy. 
Compare the modern idea of 
the genealogical derivation of 
species from a single type, and 
cf. Rep. 8, 547 a : TavTrjs toi 
yeveds xpl ^dvai eivai o~tclo~w. 



n O A I T I K o s 



INTRODUCTION TO THE STATESMAN. 



llIE contrast between the Sophist and the Philosopher is 
paralleled by that between the ideal and actual Statesman. 
The one of these is the philosopher under a different aspect, 
surveying from above and yet guiding the life of states : the 
other, in Plato's view, is the most sophistical of all sophists 

(tOV TTCLVTtoV <TO(f)L<TT5>V \xkyMTTOV yOT]Ta KCU TaVTTJS TtjS T^XVTjS 6/X- 

TrtLpoTaTov). But in the present inquiry, although this thought 
may be detected from the first (see 258 b and note, compared 
with 292 b), it is ironically kept back, and instead of starting 
from the known characteristics of a class of persons, the speakers 
begin by forming an a priori conception of what the States- 
man ought to be. In fact, this dialogue, in a different subject- 
matter, combines the problem of the Sophistes with that of the 
Philosophus, and seeks to determine, not only an existing coun- 
terfeit, but an ideal reality. At the same time it is shewn that 
the true Statesman and Governor cannot be defined without 
reference to the actual, mixed conditions of human things. The 
whole is intended by the author to be a study in scientific 
method. 

Further remarks on the dialogue will be better understood 
if they are prefaced with, a brief outline of the dialogue itself. 

§ 1. It is assumed that the Statesman is master of a science : 
and that not a mere handicraft in which the thought cannot 
be separated from the work, but a theory, which however, as 
a theory of government, has an immediate reference to prac- 
tice. This theory must be essentially the same whether applied 
to a state or a household, and whether he who holds it be 
invested with authority or not. Further, the commands of the 
Statesman are not derivative, but issue from himself. These 
*b2 



i> INTRODUCTION 

commands aim at controlling a work which affects living crea- 
tures in the aggregate. But what living creatures '( The 
respondent inclines to say " man" at once. But he is warned 
to be cautious, lest lie be making " a distinction without a 
difference." For what ground is there for supposing that the 
distinction between man and the brutes is more rational than 
that between Greek and Barbarian, or that man has more 
right than any other thinking animal, such as the crane, to 
set himself over against all other creatures ? By gradual sub- 
divisions, much as in the game called " Animal, vegetable, and 
mineral, 1 ' the human race is at last determined to be the sphere 
of statesmanship : mankind being in the last place distinguished 
by a merely mathematical and physical difference from the 
pig, or, as bipes implume, from the novcpovouv (\>v\a dpvidoov. 
(258 b — 267 c.) 

§ 2. The King, then, has been denned as the herdsman, 
the nurturer or nourisher of men. But there now appears 
this difference between the king and other herdsmen, that, while 
the cowherd is everything to his own cattle, there are many 
others who, equally with the king, may claim to be the shep- 
herds of the human flock. The merchant, husbandman, baker, 
gymnast, physician, have all a share in their nurture. In order 
to perceive the reason of this difference we must call to our 
assistance an ancient tale. 

There has been, and will be again, a time when the king is 
the shepherd of his people, but not in the present cycle of the 
world's life. For there are alternate cycles, during one of which 
the universe is guided by the Divine hand, and then again, 
through many ages, the vast round fabric is left to revolve 
alone. Of the former time we have a dim tradition in the 
fables of the golden age and of the earth-born seed : and in 
the latter we and our fathers have been living. Of this " re- 
verse of doom" a trace remains in the story that Zeus once 
made the sun and the stars to return from their setting to 
their rising. The gifts of Triptolemus and Demeter, Prome- 
theus, Hephaestus and Athene, were rendered necessary by 
the naked and helpless state of man, when first left, with the 
whole universe, to his own guidance. For in that former state 
he lived under the care of a Divine shepherd, who was all- 
sufficient for his flock : happy if they used their golden hours 



TO THE STATESMAN. v 

in the improvement of their reason : otherwise, less happy 
than we may be. How great, then, was our error, when we 
mistook the Statesman, who is a man of like nurture and 
education with hia citizens, for the Deity who ruled and tended 
mankind under the perfect conditions of that former cycle, 
when all things, including man himself, sprang of themselves 
from the Earth, and hence there was no property nor any 
possession of wives and children. And there is another error 
of less moment which the tale makes clear. Our definition is 
at once too wide and too narrow : too wide, because including 
more than the Statesman ; too narrow, because not including 
him at all. He is not the feeder of his people, though he 
has the care of them. The word "care" would have included 
him also. But the general name "care of herds" must be 
divided until the King or Statesman is separated from all 
rivals and left quite alone. 

First, he is distinguished from the shepherd of the theo- 
cracy ; next, from the tyrant, who rules by force. The King 
or Statesman has the care of willing bipeds. (267 c — 276 e.) 

§ 3. Still, even with the help of our tale, which grew upon 
our hands, we have made an unfinished work. This descrip- 
tion is a mere colourless sketch, which must be filled up by 
further argument. And for this purpose we must have 
recourse to an example. For as children in learning to read 
are taught to recognize the letters of words which they know 
not, by being shewn the same letters in words which they 
know, so the mind is taught the principles of things, which 
having seen in one form she fails to recognise in others more 
strange and complicated. This will be illustrated by the 
example which is now to be chosen. 

The art of weaving woollen cloth is one of the simplest we 
eould name. Yet we might describe it by a long series of 
divisions, distinguishing it from the making of other fabrics 
and coverings, without, after all, separating it from those arts 
to which it is most nearly related. For suppose we had thus 
defined it as " the art of working in wool." Is there not the 
process of carding, which is the opposite of weaving together, 
and those of spinning and fulling and of darning, all of which 
answer to the definition but are none of them included in the 
weaver's art ? Then there is the making of the loom and 



vi INTRODUCTION 

shuttle and other implements of weaving, which are adminicular 
to the art but different from the art itself. 

We distinguish; then, arts instrumental from arts operative. 
And of arts operative in wool-working there is a further dis- 
tinction, also depending on a universal division of the arts 
into combining and discriminating. Discriminating processes 
in wool-working are carding and one part of the use of the 
comb. But wool is combined, (i) By twisting: either hard 
with the spindle, to make the warp, or softly with the hand; 
to make the woof. (2) By the crossing and intertexture of 
the warp and woof, which is weaving. (277 a — 283 a.) 

§ 3 b. Now it may be said that "this is too long;'''' and 
that we might have arrived at the definition without the 
intermediate steps. 

This leads us into a digression on Excess and Defect. For 
want of dialectic, men are apt to confuse that which is more 
with that which is too much. Whereas there are two ways 
of measuring size and number ; one, simply by comparison of 
greater and less, the other, by reference to the standard of 
what is meet or proper. Without such a standard there could 
be no art or science. This is the real meaning of the saying 
that the science of measurement embraces all things. 

So lamentable are the results of an unphilosophic method. 
And this suggests the further reflection, that as each reading 
lesson is learnt, not for its own sake, but for the sake of learn- 
ing to read; so our present inquiry is not so much on account 
of the Statesman as for our improvement in dialectic and in 
the alphabet of the ideal world. 

From all which we gather that the length of our discussion 
is to be judged, not by comparison, but by its meetness or 
fitness : and this not with a view to pleasure, nor chiefly to the 
ease or rapidity with which the object of search is found, but 
by its meetness or fitness to improve men in dialectic and 
awaken in them the faculty of invention. (283 b — 287 a.) 

§ 3 c. We now endeavour to apply our example to the dis- 
covery of the King. His art is to be separated from those, 
adminicular and operative, which, like his own, are necessary 
to the life of the city. 

The productions of these are divided into seven kinds, viz. 
instruments, vessels, seats, shelters, sports, nourishments, and 



TO THE STATESMAN. vii 

materials: in none of which is the king's work discoverable. 
Next in the order of possessions come tamo animals of every 
kind, the art of herding which, including men, has been 
already distinguished from that of the king. Lastly, there is 
the class of slaves and other servants, amongst whom, strangely, 
appears the first glimpso of a character rivalling the king. 
Not amongst the slaves, of course, nor amongst tradesmen 
(though there is a political science of trade), nor heralds and 
other ministers of state. But first the prophet, herald of the 
Gods, and the priest who mediates between earth and heaven, 
have a kingly air. In Egypt the king must be a priest, and 
the Archon-Basileus at Athens performs sacred rites. 

At last our eye has caught the stragglers of a tumultuous 
throng, who presently sweep into full view — the actual rivals 
of the King. (287 b — 290 c) 

§ 4. A motley crew, and monstrous to the philosopher's eye. 
Some fierce and cruel as centaurs, some weak but cunning. 
These greatest impostors of all sophists do the business of the 
state : but, though hard the task, they must be separated 
from the true Statesman and King. For of the three forms 
of government ordinarily recognized, Monarchy, Democracy, 
Oligarchy, with the additional branches of Tyranny and Aristo- 
cracy, can it be said that any one is determined by Eeason? 
How can the difference of many, few or one, of poor or rich, 
or even that which we have recognized between persuasion 
and force, distinguish the knowing from the ignorant ruler? 
True,, many cannot have this knowledge, nor can that rude 
multitude who call themselves the wealthy or the few. Those 
who are indeed the few, whether poor or rich, whether they 
rule by force or by persuasion, whether with or without law, 
and by whatever means, so long as they rule with knowledge 
for the good of the state, are the true rulers, and theirs is the 
true form of government. Those forms to which the name is 
given are imitations, better or worse, of this one form. (291 a 
—293 e.) 

§ 4 b. The Greek mind is shocked by the suggestion that 
the true government may be without law. But the sove- 
reignty of law is not a perfect substitute for that of a wise 
and living will. For general rules, which are in their na- 
ture simple, cannot embrace every contingency which may 



viii [NTRODUCTION 

arise in the inlinitc complexity of human tilings. The law, 
like Croon, 

tv yOos ijlovvov €i> avTu r/jopei 

co? (j)i](Ttv avros, Kovbev ak\o, tovt opflcos ^eiv. 

Laws are necessary (like rules in the gymnasium), because 
the ruler is not able at every moment to be prescribing for 
individual cases : and also because the lawgiver will not always 
be with his people. But suppose a physician going into a far 
country, and writing memoranda for his patients to observe 
until his return : should he come back and find that from 
some change of climate his prescriptions are no longer suitable, 
must he be bound by what he has once written ? And if the 
true legislator, or one like him, were to come again on earth, 
must he be bound by the letter of the old precepts? It is 
commonly said, ' Let a man persuade his city, and so let him 
improve the laws/ But and if he forces a better law upon his 
countrymen, will he be any the less a good lawgiver ? The truth 
is, that, whether poor or rich, whether with or without law, 
whether by persuasion or force, the true statesman is he who 
governs Avisely, who does what is expedient, and preserves and 
makes better those committed to his care. (293 e — 397 b.) 

§ 4 c. It was said above, that of the imitations of the true 
government some were better, others worse. Here the distinc- 
tion finds place which we before rejected, between the obser- 
vation and neglect of law. In the absence of the true sove- 
reign, it is best for every state to preserve its laws, which 
it may be presumed that the first lawgiver made after his 
conception of the ideal pattern. This is illustrated by an 
imaginary case (with evident allusion to Athens). Suppose 
that men, from their experience of the wickedness of physi- 
cians and pilots, determined to bind them by edicts, which 
they passed in their assembly or in their senate, at the sug- 
gestion of any unprofessional adviser who chose to speak, and 
regulated thereby the use of drugs and surgical instruments 
and the build and navigation of ships in peace and war. Sup- 
pose these edicts engraved on lasting marble, and on the no 
less lasting monuments of custom and tradition. Suppose, 
further, that our medical practitioners and naval captains were 
chosen annually in the same assembly, and were liable to be 



TO THE STATESMAN. ix 

indicted publicly by any citizen so soon as their annual term 
expired. A further sanction would be necessary. Were any 
found searching into the truth of navigation and medicine 
beyond what was written, he must first be set down by public 
opinion as a babbling, star-gazing sophist, and then accused in 
court of corrupting the youth : and if convicted of persuading 
any man to sail or to be healed contrary to the customs, he 
must suffer the last penalty : seeing that no man must be 
wiser than the laws, which he who runs may read. 

The result would be the hopeless extinction of these arts, 
and of any others to which this plan should be applied. Yet 
is a worse case conceivable : if, when the laws of any art had 
been thus laid down, those elected by suffrage or by lot were 
to despise the laws and act in defiance of them, not from the 
knowledge of any principle, but for the sake of gain or favour. 
For though the arts were destroyed, there was in the former 
case a certain ground of experience or probability, which is 
thus annihilated. 

Hence in the absence of the true lawgiver, the best course 
(though only a second best) is to maintain the laws. 

This distinction, between constitutional and unconstitutional 
government, was previously applied to monarchy and oligarchy, 
and is now extended to democracy. Whence there are now 
seven so-called forms of government, of which one only de- 
serves the name : — scientific monarchy, constitutional mon- 
archy, tyranny, aristocracy, oligarchy, constitutional demo- 
cracy, unconstitutional democracy. When we contemplate the 
six last named, the wonder is that cities should exist at all. 
Constitutional monarchy is better than aristocracy, and this is 
better than constitutional democracy. Of the remaining three, 
unconstitutional democracy, or anarchy, is the least bad, and 
tyranny is the worst of all. 

But all are to be rejected, as not answering to the object of 
our search. The heads of these false governments are not 
statesmen but partisans ; they are mere phantasms, like the 
constitutions which they administer ; the most egregious imita- 
tors, impostors, and sophists. (297 c — 303 b.) 

§ 5. The actual statesmen being thus disposed of, the way 
is still further cleared towards the unveiling of the true king. 
Yet all that we have hitherto gained is negative, except that 
*c 



x INTRODUCTION 

lie rules men wisely, according to true principles. Like refiners 
of gold, we have purged away baser minerals, but have not 
yet eliminated those precious metals which have the strongest 
affinity for the gold. In other words, our definition would 
apply equally to the general, the judge, the wise and eloquent 
orator, as to the king. 

But the art of statecraft has this distinguishing note, that it 
directs the functions of the rest, and has a universal working. 
The orator knows how to persuade, the judge how incor- 
ruptibly to administer the law, the general how to conduct 
war successfully : but none except the king or statesman can 
determine where persuasion is to be used instead of force, 
what the law ought to be, whether war is to be levied, or 
peace preserved. Thus statecraft is, as was before anticipated, 
the commanding science, not herself acting, but directing those 
who have the power to act. And while each of the rest has 
a particular sphere, the office of the king embraces every func- 
tion of the common life. (303 c — 305 e.) 

We have now separated the king or statesman from all who 
were likely to be confounded with him. It remains, in accord- 
ance with our example, to describe the manner of his work. 
What are the warp and woof of the royal fabric ? and how is 
it woven ? 

First, we must note that there are two opposite qualities 
which merit praise, courage and gentleness, or, in other words, 
quickness and slowness : which, however, if they remain apart 
run to excess, and equally become blameable and even de- 
structive. Next, that every art of combination, even the 
humblest, seeks to bring together elements which have first 
been separated from what is worthless. Hence as the art 
of carding ministered to weaving, so the kingly art makes use 
of education and other tests for purging the good from the bad. 
The worst are cast forth by exile or death. The mean and 
ignorant are enslaved. Of the rest, the brave and gentle, that 
is the hard warp and soft woof, are combined : the eternal part 
being compacted with a divine, the mortal with a human, bond. 
The divine bond is right opinion confirmed by reason, and this 
is implanted in the mind — the divines particula aura? — thus 
imparting gentleness to the rugged and prudence to the smooth 
and yielding nature. 



TO THE STATESMAN. xi 

This is the most important and difficult branch of the ruling 
science. The human bonds are easily imposed where the di- 
vine exist. They arc the regulations concerning marriage, 
whereby the brave and gentle races are physically as well 
as mentally crossed and interwoven : though flesh and blood 
may find this saying hard. 

This having been effected, the offices of state are to be 
distributed amongst both kinds : the two natures being in 
each case either united in a single person, or equally repre- 
sented where more than one officer is required : that the state 
may act at once with energy and discretion. 

And so there is wrought the perfect web, whereby the true 
Statesman holds the whole city together in concord and amity, 
and secures for his subjects the happiest life which is possible 
for a society of men. (305 e — 311.) 



REMARKS. 

I. Dialectical Aspects. Relation to the Sophist. 

Amongst many differences of treatment which might be 
expected from the change of subject and the fertility of Plato's 
invention, the thoughts on method and the nature of know- 
ledge, which were thrown out in the Sophist, are not forgotten, 
but indirectly receive further development. 

a. The process of divisions has acquired new significance. 
The problem is explained to be, "to distinguish one kind of art 
from all others, and by stamping these with a single negative 
form, learn to conceive of all science under two heads, namely, 
statecraft, and that science which is not statecraft." (258 c.) 
This is clearly an application of the view of Not-Being which 
had just been given. But it soon appears that the mere 
abstract notion of Difference may be capriciously applied. To 
distinguish man from other animals, for example, or Greek 
from Barbarian, is a merely arbitrary procedure, unless we 
have found a rational ground for the distinction, which can 
only be done by a method of successive exclusions, each of 
which implies a certain knowledge of that which is excluded, 
as well as of that which is retained. Even so meagre a defi- 
nition of man as that he is a featherless biped implies the 
*c 2 



v.. INTRODUCTION 

knowledge of at least two positive qualities of the class of 
birds. This thought is not worked out further at the time, 
but in the later stages of the argument the complexity of all 
real knowledge, implied already in the " communion of ideas," 
is more fully recognised than elsewhere in Plato. The defi- 
nition of the Sun which Socrates on the previous day hail 
thought sufficient, " that he is the brightest orb that rolls in 
Heaven about the earth," on to Xa^-pdrarov ecrrt t&v Kara 
tov ovpavbv Iovtgov irepl yijv (Thenat. 208 d), would not now 
satisfy the requirements of the Stranger. " It is not enough 
to describe wool-weaving as the greatest and fairest of all 
ministries that wait on the working of wool : the other 
attendant arts must be carefully stripped from round it." 
(281 c.) That is, each of these must be so far defined as to 
exclude weaving. The boundary line must be clearly drawn 
from either side. And thus the definition of the Statesman 
involves a certain account of the general, the judge, the orator, 
as well as a description of the no-constitutions of existing states. 
Here is an approach, though a very partial one, to the ideal 
of science which is made a test of the happiness or misery 
of the children of earth in Saturn's reign : " learning from 
every nature, what each by its proper faculty had perceived 
differently from others and could contribute to the treasury 
of knowledge." (272 c.) 

So much has been gained from perceiving the correlation 
of the positive and negative elements of knowledge. Closely 
akin to this was the reaction, which the " Sophist" justified 11 , 
from a merely negative and analytical method of knowledge. 
This also is continued in the Statesman. In their zeal for 
the method of divisions, the Stranger and his respondent fall 
into a natural error. In seeking to be definite they forget to 
be comprehensive, and omit a needful generalization. They 
divide the science of feeding ; whereas the king in this pre- 
sent cycle is not a feeder, although he has the care of a 
flock. This error is duly exposed and rectified ; and it is 
further shewn that the distinctions hitherto made have only 
brought out a colourless outline of the King. It is from this 
point that the more serious portion of the inquiry begins. 

a TeKeaiTarri lravroiv Xoywv £<tt\v atpdviais to §«xx'<-'P' / C e " / eKaiTTov anb ■navrwv. 
Soph. 259 e. 



TO THE STATESMAN. xiii 

b. The generalizing or combining process b , the defect of 
which had been just noticed, here resumes its proper import- 
ance. The ideas on which the definition of the Statesman mainly 
turns arc drawn from the not very obvious example of cloth- 
weaving; and an example is explained to mean the illustra- 
tion of some great or unfamiliar truth by the exhibition of the 
leading principles of that truth in a simple and familiar case. 
We are again reminded of the complexity of the world of 
which philosophy speaks to us, and how combinations which 
in the abstract are sufficiently understood, become lost when 
we endeavour to follow the concrete development of things. 
(278 c, d.) We are told that it is only by dialectic (not by 
any sensible mean) that the similitude of the highest truths 
can be displayed. And as the definition of the weaver is 
symbolical of that of the Statesman ; so the chief value of this 
whole discussion is to shadow forth still higher truths than 
those with which it is concerned. (285 d, e.) 

What then are the principles suggested by the present 
example ? First, we are taught the inadequacy of the method 
of dichotomies as hitherto pursued. If the view of this 
method already stated is correct, we can easily imagine that 
Young Socrates, or let us rather say a pupil of the Academy 
at this time, was not prepared for the elaborateness of the 
discussion. In fact we have seen him beguiled by the Stranger 
into thinking that the journey was ended, when it was not yet 
well begun. (265 b.) Plato here shews that the real work of 
distinction and comparison, which deserves the name of dialec- 
tic, is a more subtle process and goes deeper than the boyish 
exercise with which he had as it were broken ground for the 
inquiry : though even through this many valuable hints had 
been conveyed, seria mista jocis. The difference in this 
respect between the earlier and later portions of the dialogue 
will be evident to any one who compares the abstract notion 
of statesmanship as a commanding theory in p. 260 a, with 
the view given in pp. 305, 306 of the relation of the kingly 
art to those of the orator, judge, and field-officer. Those 

b (rvvaywyr]. Cf. 278 c, rabrhv eV pare Bacon's saying, "The strength of 

krtpqi Stto-n-cKTuevu, 5o£a£6/j.evov opd&s all sciences is, as the strength of the 

Kal <njvax0€v. old man's faggot, in the bond." 

c See General Introduction. Com- 



xiv INTRODUCTION 

who make this comparison will not think that the author of 
(his dialogue believed his definition of bipea implume to be a 
serious contribution to the science of human nature. As the 
dialogue proceeds the earlier divisions seem to be forgotten, 
or to be neglected as a mere scaffolding (l , else the analogy 
just noticed between p. 260 a and 305 d (ovk avryv Set Ttpar- 
Ti.iv, dAA' apyj.iv tG>v bvvajxevwv TipaTTtiv) could hardly have 
been overlooked by the speakers themselves. 

The imperfection of mere external classifications being thus 
recognized, there follows the remark, already quoted, on the 
necessity of finding the mutual boundary between the object of 
search and all kindred species. (281 c.) 

In applying this to weaving we obtain two fresh thoughts, 
which are found valuable for the main argument : the distinc- 
tion of atria and ^vvaina, of operative and adminicular arts ; 
and the universality of the two great sciences of composition 
and division. 

The former affords the hint for the elimination from the 
work of the king of various arts, without which civil life could 
not proceed : the latter is the key-note of the final passage, in 
which the last touches are given to the image of the King. 
For by help of our example we are enabled to proceed fur- 
ther, even after all possible distinctions have been drawn : and 
when all rival arts have been stripped away we see in the 
royal function the twofold process of division and composition : 
division, by which, practically, good citizens are selected, 
and theoretically the brave and gentle elements are distin- 
guished : composition, by which the diverse materials thus 
cleansed and prepared are combined in a smooth and perfect 
web. These two are the counterpart of the twofold process of 
dialectic, by which the objects of thought are distinguished 
and combined according to truth. This process is incidentally 
described in a passage of the Politicus already quoted (285 
a, b), in which the complex determinations of real knowledge 
are contrasted with the off-hand generalizations and distinc- 
tions of sciolism ; and which is in fact an application and 
development of the conception of scientific method expressed 
in Soph. 259 d. 

d Cf. Phsedr. 265 d : tb p.\v &\\a rw ovti 7rai5ia TreiraiaQai. 



TO THE STATESMAN. w 

c. These arc the chief points of that instruction in dialectic, 
which is commended to us by the Elcatic Stranger as the most 
valuable result of the dialogue. We may gather from them 
that Plato was at this time striving after a philosophy of the 
concrete, and endeavouring to substitute real and fruitful in- 
quiry for the barren logical excrcitations, the sweeping gene- 
ralizations and verbal distinctions of his contemporaries, per- 
haps of his own scholars. The aim constantly held before the 
mind is the attainment of greater definitcness and fulness. 
" This is true, but not explicit or complete " (aA?/0es jue*> ov jj,i]v 
adepts ye ovbe rikeov) is the repeated complaint. Since it has 
been proved in the Sophist that different ideas may have com- 
munion or correlation with each other, it becomes the task of 
philosophy to discern the threads which connect them. And 
nowhere, except in the Philebus and Parmenides, has Plato 
buckled to this task more earnestly. In the latter part of the 
Phaedrus indeed there is a conception of an art of rhetoric, 
which should be based on a complete science of psychology, 
the realization of which would far exceed in definiteness and 
completeness this somewhat desultory sketch. But it is one 
thing to imagine a science, and quite another thing to attempt, 
however imperfectly, to work it out. The " splendid ideal" 
of the Phaedrus, like other intuitions of that dialogue, is an 
anticipation rather than an embodiment of method : not neces- 
sarily an early anticipation, for if wildness of imagination 
marks a jugendschrift, what is to be said of the my thus in the 
Statesman ? In the sixth book of the Republic there is ex- 
pressed a more general conception of the ladder of hypotheses 
by which science climbs to the ideal world, whence she de- 
scends without the aid of the ladder by the chain of ideas. 
But this notion, though implying a connexion of ideas, is still 
vague, and gives less promise of the reality of science than the 
method employed in the Politicus. 

The Republic professes to be intelligible rather than exact, 
and to proceed by popular methods. Even the order of the 
sciences is not worked out as a dialectical problem, though the 
seventh book contains passages of great subtilty and depth. 
What is wanting in demonstration is " evened o'er'''' by the 
abundance of imagination. But Socrates hints more than once 
to Glaucon that there is a " longer way," which the dialectical 



xvi INTRODUCTION 

.student must learn to tread. It is possible that we have a 
sample of this in tin; present dialogue, which contains an ela- 
borate defence of lengthened argument, and in which Young 
Socrates is taken further afield than he had any thought of 
going. 

This struggle towards definitcness and reality is pro tanto an 
approach on Plato's part to the later philosophy of Aristotle. 
But there still remains between them an ineffaceable difference 
of character. Plato when most concrete retains an undimin- 
ished hold of the universal : ovpavu eorrjpiKro Kapi] kox It:\ 
ydovl fiaLvet. The idealizing spirit may be exorcised, "tamen 
usque recurrit." Gliscit intellectus altior. The true king, when 
adapting himself to the particular circumstances of his state? 
inflicting exile or death on some;- uniting others in marriage, 
is still the perfectly wise philosopher with his eye fixed on the 
pattern in the heavens. Contemplation and action are not 
sundered : the knowledge of the universal truth is not sup- 
posed to hinder the individual applications 

II. Socratic and Pythagorean Elements. 

a. Continuance of the Socratic Spirit. The question here 
treated by the Stranger, after being proposed by Socrates, is 
almost identical with some of those with which, according to 
Xenophon, the real Socrates was most engaged : u 7roAts ; n 
ttoXltikos ; ti apxv avQp&nutv ; tC apxt-«bs avOpunrcoi; ; And 
though his method of search on these topics, as recorded in 
the Memorabilia, is much simpler than that here used, it is 
evident that Plato has in many instances only followed up the 
hints given by his master. 

There is, first, the postulate on which the whole dialogue 
proceeds, that statesmanship is a science, that knowledge 
ought to govern. You would not doubt, says Socrates, whe- 
ther to place a skilful or unskilful pilot at the helm (I. i, 9) : 
nor would you choose a pilot, or a carpenter, or a flute-player, 
as you do your rulers, by casting lots (I. 2, 9). (Cf. Polit. 258 
b, 290 e, 292 b, 298.) 

e " And therefore the speculation that all things by a scale did ascend to 
was excellent in Parmenides and Plato, Unity." — Bacon, 
though in them only a speculation, 



TO THE STATESMAN. xvii 

2. The imago of a herdsman, under which the king is at 
first conceived, common enough certainly in poetry, was one 
which Socrates delighted to use. "It is a bad herdsman 
{fioG>v dye'A?;s j'o/xetk) who makes the number of the cattle less/' 
was his well-known censure of the thirty tyrants (I. 2, 32). 
The coincidence of language here is enough to justify the sup- 
position that there is some connexion of thought : although 
Plato evidently thinks that there arc cases where taking the 
heads of citizens may be a purgation of the common weal. 
(261 d alib., 293 d.) 

3. The distinction of the king and tyrant in Mem. IV. 6, 
I2 f , is nearly the same with that which Plato accepts pro- 
visionally at one stage of the dialogue (277 d); and the same 
passage of XenophonS expresses what Plato speaks of as the 
commonly received mode of characterizing the several forms 
of government (291 e). The thought however is here so ob- 
vious that it would not be safe to lay much stress on this 
coincidence, if taken alone. 

4. The general and the judge (aTparrjyLKos, 8i/caoriKos) are 
named by Socrates as next in dignity to the statesman (ttoXitl- 
kos). Mem. II. 6, 38. Cf. Polit. 305. 

But the chief traces of the historical Socrates in this dia- 
logue, as in the Sophistes, are the method of definition by 
exclusions, and the use of common examples to suggest hypo- 
theses 11 : both much extended, and if not systematized, yet 
made the objects of reflection and theory ; but in their en- 
larged features bearing unmistakeably the marks of their first 
origin. (See Sophist, sub. init., note on Sco/cpar?;?.) 

Turning from the Socrates of Xenophon to the Platonic 
Socrates, we find a passage of the Euthydemus, in which the 

f Ba<ri\eiav Se Kal rvpavv'iSa apxai ivo/j.i£ei> elvaf otrov 5' e/c rifj.ijiJia.Toov, 

fj.ev a.fx<poT(pas riyuTO etvai, Stacpepeiv ir\ovroKpariav ottov 5' e/c irdvTUV 87;- 

Se pAAtjAcoj' iv6/xi£e. ttji/ fj.ei/ yap eic6w noKparlav. 

tuv re twp avQpomuiv Kal Kara, vdfxovs *• Mem. I. 2, 37 : 'AAAa ra>vSe rot 

twv iroKiwv apxh", fiaffi\et<w riyu-ro' ere a7re'x€<r0ai 3> Sco/cpares, SeTjtrei, T<2y 

Ti]v 8e o.k6vto}v Kal /xt? koto v6fxovs, oTcuTeW Kal twv tzktSvoop Kal rtav 

oAA' (jttws b iLpxw fiovXono, rvpav- x a ^ K€& " / ' Ka ^ T"P ol/j-at aiirovs ^8rj 

yj'5 a# KaTaTZTp?(pdai Siadpv\Aovfj.4vovs virb 

s Kal oirov fiev £k twv tos v6/j.ijj.a ctov Kal tuv (Sovk6\wv ye. Cf. 

e-rriTeXovvTaiv at apxal KaOitrravrai, Gorg. 491 a, Sympos. 221 e. 

TaVTf\V 



r))v -KoAiTiiav api<TTOKpariav 



*d 



xviii INTRODUCTION 

question here solved by the Stranger is raised, but, Socratico 
more, is left unanswered. Some of tlic elements of the inquiry 
are, however, the same as here, and the passage has nearly 
the same relation to this dialogue which the opening chapters 
of the Protagoras have to the Sophist. (Euthyd. 289-291.) 

" An art is required which can both make and enable us to 
use rightly what is made. The art of speech-making is not 
this, because the speech-maker is often different from the 
speaker. Nor generalship, for that is a kind of hunting : and 
the huntsman often docs not use what he catches, but delivers 
them to others, and so the general yields up his prey to the 
statesman. Let us try then the art of the statesman, or the 
king. Here we fall into a labyrinth of inquiry (&ait€p eh 
XajivpivOov epL-necrovres, olojxevoi ijbr] im Ttkei zlvai, TtepiKap.- 
\}/avTes iraXiv Sa-rrep iv apxfl Trjs ^rj/o-eco? avzfyavryxzv Sines, ko.1 
tov Xcrov beopitvoL, oaovnep ore to TtpGtTov io-KOTTovp,ev). For 
when it is admitted that all the other arts yield over their 
productions to the political or royal art (which are the same), 
and that this art, by determining the use of everything, is the 
pilot and saviour of the state, the question rises, what is her 
peculiar work ? 

"According to a previous agreement, this must be knowledge 
of some kind, and this excludes wealth, freedom, peace, and 
the like. Say, then, she makes the citizens wise. In what 
knowledge does she make them wise, and what use will they 
make of their wisdom ? Thus the original question returns 
in a new form." 

The thing sought for here is the same which the Politicus 
professes to find, an absolute principle of life : a speculative 
truth which is also the consummation of practical good : a 
commanding theory. It was this which Socrates spent his 
life in seeking : of which he confessed his ignorance, while he 
declared life to be intolerable if it were not known. The 
political problem is only a particular instance of the eternal 
question, what is true and good ? 

There is also considerable likeness in the manner of search. 
And here it may be remarked that the specializing or indi- 
vidualizing effort described in the previous section is a genuine 
continuation of the work of Socrates, whose pertinacity in 
sticking like a gad-fly to his respondent is most conspicuous, 



TO THE STATESMAN. xix 

where he forces men by a fresh question from some generality 
in which they would gladly rest (apyovoa — tL airepyaCtTai • 
— rlva bij i7rt(TTriixi]v ; y ri x/^o'/xefla ;) 

The chief difference is that the Elcatic Stranger works out 
an answer to the question, which Socrates asked of Euthydc- 
mus and his brother in vain : not however to the final question, 
which Socrates, if true to his vocation, would have still pressed 
upon the Stranger, though the problem in the present case 
was more limited than in the former. But this difficulty, like 
that about the nature of virtue, is evaded rather than solved 
by the more complex notion of the state, whose members 
have not all the same office. 

As in the Republic there is found a place for a virtue in 
harmony with reason although lower than reason, so here a 
place is found for political happiness (k<x0' chtov tvhaijxovi 
7T€(f)VK€ yiyvzvQai 7ro'Aet). All free citizens are to be trained 
so as to think correctly of what is noble, just, and good, and 
to give a reason of their opinion (/^era /3e/3aiwo-eoos). But with 
the rulers or law-givers alone exists that perfect consciousness 
which is the fountain of right action for the state, and whose 
will determines in accordance with reason the use to be made 
of all possessions (ocra t^rai Krija-ews). Other parallels might 
be drawn (e.g. from Gorg. 517), shewing that the spirit of 
Socrates is still working under the Eleatic mask : and if the 
Socratic humour no longer makes perpetual skirmishes, it 
lurks in ambush to take the reader by surprise, and is occa- 
sionally transformed by the intensity of Plato's mood into an 
almost savage irony. The writer knew well how laughable 
was his picture of all things growing backwards in the golden 
age ; nor could Swift have wished for more than to demonstrate 
the close relationship between mankind and the pig. 

There is the very genius of satire in the picture of the self- 
exaltation of the crane, who looks on man as an inferior 
animal ; and in the lofty scorn with which the philosopher 
professes ignorance of the motley throng of satyrs and centaurs, 
who are in fact no other than the princes and potentates of 
this world. 

Briefly, the object which Socrates set before himself and 
others, Plato, when he wrote this dialogue, believed himself 
partially to have attained — the science of truth and good : to 
*d 2 



xx INTRODUCTION 

Socrates an ideal only, dwarfing to nothing all actual know- 
ledge ; to Plato an ideal ever in process of realization through 
the activity of reason, when awakened by dialectic to perceive 
the existence and follow the relations of ideas. 

b. Pythagorean influence. Wherever Plato, especially in 
his later dialogues, affirms anything respecting the order of 
nature, the destiny of the soul, or the fabric of the state, 
there is reason to suspect the influence, more or less controlled 
by dialectic, of Pythagorean notions. To a great extent he 
used these merely as forms of imagination through which he 
could give more lively expression to his thoughts, but there 
can be no doubt that this scientific mysticism had an increas- 
ing charm for his mind, and had a still greater ascendancy 
over his immediate followers. It is less generally admitted 
that his dialectic also had a Pythagorean element, and yet it 
seems far from improbable that, as he strengthened his belief 
in the flux of phenomena by the study of Heraclitus and 
Protagoras, and learnt from Parmenides to trust in the fixity 
of ideas, so in the " struggle towards the concrete/ J of which 
the argument of the Politicus is an important step, he may- 
have been assisted by reading in Philolaus of the eternal 
Harmony, whereby the Limit was impressed on the Unlimited, 
to the production of a beautiful world. It was seen, in com- 
menting on the Theaetetus (p. 201), that the philosophers who 
said there was no knowledge of the Simple, but only of the 
Complex, were probably Pythagorean. The word Koivcovta, 
by which the correlation of ideas is expressed in the Sophist, 
occurs in a place of the Gorgias where the Pythagorean 
colouring is evident (Gorg. 507 e — 508 a). The ju,e0e£is of 
the Parmenides is the jui'ju.acris of the Pythagoreans. And in 
the Philebus the Koafxos rts ao-cojotaros (Trepas, aireipov, [alktov, 
air [a, ixirpov), which forms the spring and framework of the 
dialogue, is of a no less unmistakeable character. 

In the present dialogue there occurs a direct criticism of 
Pythagorean doctrine which affords a good illustration of 
Plato's manner of dealing with the philosophies which most 
influenced him. The Stranger is led incidentally to defend 
the tediousness of the ' : longer way," whose object is not to 
give pleasure, or to obtain a speedy result, but to enlighten 
the reason. He does so by distinguishing that which is too 



TO THE STATESMAN. xxi 

much from that which is more; a distinction which had 
escaped even those philosophers who averred that the science 
of measurement embraces all things. They led the way to 
a great truth, which for want of dialectic they could not 
work out. It is true that without measure all arts would ho 
destroyed, but there arc two kinds of measure, one simply 
relative, another, which is the secret of production, having 
reference to the standard of what is meet. Here the Pytha- 
gorean doctrine of numbers is brought into contact with the 
Socratic ethical idea 1 . Aristotle would have said that certain 
thinkers acknowledged the formal, but ignored the final cause. 
In this passage, as perhaps in the Philebus, 44 c, the Pytha- 
goreans are employed as " diviners" to point the way to the 
spring which Plato himself must open. 

We pass from this manifest allusion to some less certain 
indications that Plato was at this time playing with the 
weapons of this school. There need hardly be mentioned the 
ludicrous mathematical definition of man as a biped ; or the 
doctrine of metempsychosis, or the astronomy passing into 
cosmology. We may confine our attention to points less 
obvious than these. 

The Pythagoreans were the only pre-Socratic school who 
set themselves to raise human life towards an ideal standard k . 
It can hardly be doubted that they had moral and political 
doctrines in the fourth century B. C. But the few fragments 
of Philolaus which remain are of a metaphysical and cosmical 
turn. We know from Herodotus and Xenophanes that Pytha- 
goras taught the immortality and transmigration of the soul ; 
from Plato that his followers observed a certain rule of life ; 
and the language of Philolaus, always full of religious fervour, 
appears to recognize the Unity of the Supreme Being 1 . The 
Pythagorean fragments even of the age immediately succeed- 
ing Plato are of doubtful authority, and are so tinged with 
Platonism, that, even if genuine, their value is diminished for 

1 Compare a saying of Socrates him- two points, which both appear in this 

self in the Memorabilia advising /xeTpt- dialogue — in the mode of teaching by 

rfrrjs in the study of \oyi<T(J.oi, and cf. parable (5t' o/ioico/xa.Twi') and in religious 

Legg. 4, 719 e, <ro\ 8' ovx ovros prjreov mysticism. 

&>s VVV elires rb /xerpiou el-rran/. aAAa ti 1 ivr\ yap 6 ayefxevu Kal &pxoov awau- 

rb /xerptov Kai oiroffov rjyreov. row debs els ael £d>v, jjlovijxos, aKivaros, 



They coincided with Socrates in avrbs avrcu 6/j.o7os, cirepos tSiv &\\ 



aw. 



xxii INTRODUCTION 

our present purpose. But it seems probable on the whole 

that the school at the earlier period of which wo speak 

combined a ceremonial asceticism with a noble and elevating 

morality. 

We know that such was the ethical teaching of Empedocles, 

who was a Pythagorean in this respect, and who at one time 

cries, 

Ou Tre'Aerat rots [xev Oe/xiTov Tobe, toIs 6° dOqurrrov 
a\Xa to fxev ttolvtcov vop.i[xov bid t zvpvpAbovTOs 
aWepos -qveKeuts rirarai, bid t' anXirov avytjs, 

and presently, with still greater vehemence, 

AeiAoi, TiavbeiXoC, Kvd\xa>v duo Yetpos €^ecr6i m ! 

i. The idea of an infinite past, and of great cycles of time, 
which took such hold of Plato's imagination, and which he 
himself refers to an Egyptian source, was probably common 
to him with the Pythagoreans, and if not derived from them, 
must have been strengthened by their teaching. According 
to Porphyry (V. Pyth. 19), "Pythagoras" taught that all 
events took place in cycles and there was nothing new : on 
Kara nepiobovs tlvcls to. yiyvo^vd ttotz irdXtv yiyverat, viov 8' 
ovbev dirX&s ecrrt. The bearing of this on the " great mythe " 
is sufficiently evident. 

2. Plato also held in common with them, and may have 
partly received from them, a strong sense of the inevitable 
prevalence of evil in the world. It is not likely that he 
derived this from Socrates, who complained not of evil but of 
ignorance, and who refrained from cosmical speculation : and 
this vein of reflection is deepest in his latest works. 

Theophrastus (Met. 9. Ritter and Preller, no) speaks of 
Plato and the Pythagoreans as being at one on this subject. 
"The nature of the whole, they say, would be impossible 
without the existence of an absolute formlessness and indefi- 
niteness and disorder (cf. Polit. 273 d, ds top rrjs dvop,oioTr)Tos 
airetpov ovra roirov bvrj), which they oppose to the combination 
of the indefinite dyad and the One. This disorder has as it 

m It is perhaps worth notice that iroiov/xevovs ineivov fiaOrjTas ehai fj.aX- 

the ffiooirr) of the Pythagoreans was in Kov crfyuivTas Qavfjca^ovaiv ^ robs inl 

some shape contemporary with Plato. to? \4yew /j.eylo-T7ju b~6£av exovras. 
See Isocrates Busir. 29, tovs irpocr- 



TO THE STATESMAN. xxiii 

were an equal share with the other nature, or even exceeds it. 
Hence even God cannot be supposed able to bring all things to 
perfection; but, if he be the cause of things, this is only bo far 
as nature admits. And perhaps he would not choose to do 
so, since there must follow an annihilation of Being, which is 
composed of opposites." 

This passage, although probably describing at second -hand 
a theory not clearly understood, sufficiently proves that the 
prevalence of imperfection was a difficulty much discussed, by 
the semi-Pythagoreans of the Academy ; and it is this difficulty 
which suggests to Plato's imagination the occasional dereliction 
of the world by God. He modifies Pythagorean optimism, 
by bringing into prominence another side of their theory. 
The disorder out of which the whole was brought into the 
present order, the breaking out again of this disorder so as 
almost to bring Chaos back again, the fear that but for Divine 
interposition the world might founder in the " infinite abyss 
of dissimilitude," are touches vividly recalling this doctrine. 

The Politicus contains another trace of this cuxop^os <pvais, 
which it would appear trifling to notice, did not the dialogue 
itself warn us that the commonest things may be examples of 
great ideas. This is the mention of raw material amongst the 
seven kinds of possessions (288, 9), with the remarkable 
appellation to irpcaToyeves elbos : (compare the TrpaToyiveca of 
the Orphic Hymns). This, and the well-known passage of the 
Tinigeus, are the chief anticipations in Plato of the Aristotelian 
material cause. 

3. The doctrine of transmigration was naturally connected 
Avith the prohibition of animal food and a higher than the 
ordinary estimate of the relation of the lower animals to man. 
In the passage of Porphyry already quoted, it is said that 
" Pythagoras taught'''' that all animal life is kindred : oti 
TiavTa ra yiyvop.zva tp.\\rvya 6p.oyevri Set vop.i(eiv. It is true 
that every later testimony on this subject, when philosophy 
had been leavened by the direct influence of Egypt and the 
East, must be received with caution n ; but if this doctrine 

n The often-quoted lines of Xeno- still nearer (364, 5) : evd" ^crav >ni\a 

phanes, about Pythagoras and the dog, iravra kou at/dpcoTroicn irpoin]VTJ cprjpes 

shew, however, something of a similar t' olccuoi re, <piAo<ppoavi>r] re SeS-qei. 
tendency. And Empedocles comes 



xxiv INTRODUCTION 

existed, Plato has used it ( i ) to point liis irony, by telling us 
not hastily to distinguish man from the beasts, some of whom 
perhaps regard him with the same contempt with which he 
looks on them ; and (2) to adorn his talc by the circumstance 
of man confabulating with the other creatures, when "there 
was nothing wild." 

That abstinence from the flesh of animals was not unknown 
in Greece, at least in the way of tradition and theory, is cer- 
tain from a remark of Plato's on the " Orphic" way of life 
(Legg. 6, 782 c), and from the lines in which Empedocles vehe- 
mently condemns the opposite practice, on the ground that so 
men are devouring their own flesh and blood . (Compare 
Aristoph. Ran. 1032 p .) And it is probable that Plato alludes 
to this when he says that the creatures did not eat each other 
in the golden age (ovk rjv ayptov ovh\v ovbe aWyjkcov e5w8at). 
Another prohibition, having evidently the same origin, and 
ascribed by Herodotus to the Pythagoreans in common Vith. 
the Orphic mystics and the Egyptians, was that against bury- 
ing in wool. 

Closely allied to these Orphic notions is the idea of purifica- 
tion (KaOapubs) , of which there are several applications in this 
dialogue and in the Sophist. (Soph. 226 d ; Polit. 293 d, 303 
d, 308 c, d. Compare the Phsedo.) Thus the idea of division 
or separation as well as that of combination (StaKpto-ts as well 
as avyKptais) had a root in the speculations of this school. 

4. It remains to notice the most important, but unfortu- 
nately the most doubtful, of the points at which this dialogue 
touches on Pythagoreanism. The fancies hitherto mentioned 
belong to morals and religion. Must not a school which 
aimed at influencing states have had a political theory, how- 
ever simple ? 

° Mop(p)]V 5' aWa^ayra naT-tjp <pi\ov vlhv aeipas 
<rcpd(ei iwevx^fJ-evos, fteya v7]Trtos' bs 5e Tropevrai 
Xiffao/J-evos Qvovt- 65' avrjKovffrriaiv 6fjioK\taiv 
<r<pa£as 8' h> /jLeydpoicri /ca/c?V aKeyvvaro Scura. 
uis 5' aureus Ttarep' vlbs lAaif ko.1 /J,rjrepa ircuSes, 
dvfj.bv aTroppaiaavre, <p{\as Kara, adptcas iSovcriv 

Ov navaeaOe <p6vov Suffix 6 ' 05 ; ovk iaopare 
'AWfaovs Sd-rrovres a«:7j5ei7j(rt v6oio ; — Emp. Ka6apfj.o(. 
P 'Op<pebs fiey yap tsAetcu 0" fj/juv KartSa^e (povoiv r ajre'xe<T0a(. 



TO THE STATESMAN. acx\ 

Stobnous has preserved three fragments from a work of 
Ecphantus of Syracuse on Royalty (7repi /3ao-iAei'as) containing 
an ideal picture of the true king. Very similar fragments 
are quoted by him from works on the same subject by Dioto- 
gencs the Pythagorean and Sthcnklas the Locrian. These 
are all later than Plato, and betray the influence of his teach- 
ing; but they display with great consistency a phase of 
Pythagorcanism which is at least interesting in connexion 
with the present dialogue. The true king is pictured as a 
kind of God on earth : having the same relation to his sub- 
jects which the Supreme Being has to the Cosmos, surveying 
them from above with an eye of wisdom (cf. Soph. 216 d), 
having for them the same affection which a father has towards 
his son, or a shepherd towards his flock, and being revered 
by them as the law is revered by those who use it. The city 
"imitates" the world and the king imitates the ruler of the 
world. 

"E^et oe ws 6ebs ttotI Koup-ov fiacriXzvs ttotI ttoKlp, Kal w? ttoXls 
ttotl Koafxov fiacnXtvs ttotl deov. 'A p,ev yap ttoXls en ttoW&v koi 
biafyepovTUiv avvapfMOcrOetcra Koap.co avvra^iv Kal app^oviav p.ep.i- 
fxarai, 6 be (3aaL\evs apyav ey&v avvnevQvvov Kal avrbs aiy vop.os 
eiiyj/vxps, 6ebs ev av6pa>iroi$ 7rapeo-x»?ju.au<7rai. — ©eopAp.6v evrL 
irpayp-a ftaariXda. (Diotog. Tiepl /3ao-tAeia?. Mullach. Fragm. 
PP- 534-5-) 

Xprj top fiauiXia aocpbv i]p.ev ovtco yap eo-eirai avrtrip-os ko\ 
(rjkdOTas r<3 Trpdrco 6eG>. Ovtos yap Ka\ <pwi evrl ko! Trpdros 
fiacriXevs re koi bwdaras, 6 be yeveaL Kal p.Lp.daL, Kal 6 p,ev ev 
r<5 Ttavri koi oAa), 6 be eirl yds, koX 6 p.ev del ra iravra biot- 
kci re koI ((Lei avrbs ev aw<3 KeKTapevos rr\v aocpCav, 6 8' ev 
Xpovoi eiii<TTdp.av q . (Sthenidas Locrus, 7repi fiacnkeCas. Ibid. 
P-53 6 -) 

'Ek tovt(x>v KOivbv dyadbv evappovTia tls koI tu>i> ttoWoJv 
6p.o(p(t)Via p-erd ireiOovs avvaboLaas. 'O /car' dperdv e£dpxo>v /caAe- 
erai re j3acrL\evs Kal evrt, ravrav eyav (ptKiav re nal Koivoaviav 
ttotl rcos vtt' avravTov, dvitep 6 6eb$ ttotl re top Koap-ov Kal ra ev 
avr<2. "OXav be rav evvoLav XPV 7rapaanevdCea6aL irpdrov p.ev 
irapd tG> /3a<nAe'cos es ra>s f3a(n\evop.eva)S, bevrepov be irapd r&vbe 

1 Compare with this the Oths Koyos of the Plnedo, 85 d : also the Parmenides, 
134 c. 



xx vi INTRODUCTION 

es tov ftacrtXea, buoia ytvvdropos ttoti vUa kcu ttoti TToip.vav 
vo/xiws kcu v6\m ttotI xpw/aeWs- avrw. (Ecphantus, irepl fiaat- 
Aeias. Ibid. p. 537-) 

Xw fxev Oebs ovre ota/coVcos Zyj&v ovre vvapeTas ovt av Trpomd^i 
Tivl XP ( ^/ jtei '°S ovbe (TT€(j)avS)u ?) avayopevoov ra>s TT€tOop.£vo&s r] 
ariixafav rws aireiOeovTas — apyii — "^' ot/xai i;ap£yo>v d£io/Lu- 
[xarov kuivrov (a\ov ZvTtOrjTi ttchtl r?/s glvtgj (fwmos. ... 06 
cTrCyijos Trap" ap.lv /3arnAei)s tiQ>s ov\ opt-oCm avrapKris ; aneiKafav 
re yap avTov, evl av aTreifcdtrae tu Kpartcrrw, /cat Ttd^res eauraK 
ireLpcop-evoi tovtm 6p.oiovv fiacnXtKol tcrovTai' ra 5' ocra /3ias ical 
av&yKas ivrl twv vitoTiTayfiivbiV, £viot<- e/<daT(j> rav irepl rav 
p.ip,acnv irpoQvp.iav dcpaipeerar x^P's tvvoias yap dp.d)^avov e£o- 
[xoicadrjvai, a /xdAiara iravrav acpavi^t to (poftepov. I2s tide r\v 
ras avdptoiTLvas cpwio? bvvarbv acpekev rb Kal neiOovs rivas 

biecrOaL en^Lb-qnep TreiOii) epyov rl kvri irapoLKtov dvdyKa,' 

Ttpaxa yap a<f) aura? avra. Karepyd^erai Ta-rrep tKtCvav bU<pvyav. 
"Ocra §' avToipva>$ ra> KaA<2 xp?jrai, tovtols ovbep.(a ttzlOovs albcas' 
e7reiS?/7rep ovbe cpd/3o? avdyKas. 'KvepydaatTo 5' av p.6vos 6 
/3ao-iAei>? av0puma> cpwei Kal robe to dyaOov, ws bta p.ip.acnv 
avTui tS> Kpicrcrovos ttotI to biov eirecrtfai. (Ibid. p. 53$ ■) There 
is much more to the same purport. 

Now are we to suppose that this somewhat crude represen- 
tation of what ought to be (resembling perhaps suspiciously 
in some features the Stoical wise man) is merely a caricature 
of Plato's philosopher-king, or had both pictures an ante- 
cedent in Pythagorean teaching ? However this may be, there 
is no mistaking the strong likeness between the ideal herein 
absolutely set forth, and that which Plato in the Politicus, 
according to his manner of treating contemporary views, first 
states, then gently sets aside, and in the sequel utilizes in a 
modified form. " In speaking of the king as the shepherd of 
his people, we borrowed the image of majesty from a theo- 
cratic time. Yet the true statesman is he who rules with 
knowledge, and harmonizes the state, bringing together 
the diverse elements of good, and rejecting the bad. He 
who does this not merely imitates but reproduces the divine 
image." 

On the above data, imperfect as they are, I hazard the 
following conjecture : That the idea of the rightful sovereignty 



TO THE STATESMAN. xxvii 

of wisdom existed in the Pythagorean school before Plato. 
That Plato's Republic, partly inspired by this, had given a 
fresh impulse to the same line of thought amongst the Pytha- 
gorizing students of the Academy ; and that Plato, having 
in the Sophistcs criticized the speculative idealism of these 
friends of his, being himself perhaps somewhat iVcsilhixiunnr, 
proceeds to call in question their equally premature idealism 
in politics : shewing, first, that a " paternal government " 
does not secure happiness unless it rouse intelligence ; and, 
secondly, that you must "first catch" your ideal king before 
you can apply your theory to practice. 

Even if this conjecture should prove baseless, it will hardly 
be questioned that the analogy which is more than hinted 
between the Cosmos and the State (w ^v\j.jxiixovixevoi koX avve- 
TToixevot k.t.K. — 274 d), the " purification" of the body politic, 
and the harmony of divers elements in the web of social life, 
are notions having a near affinity to Pythagorean teaching. 
Nor would it be rash to affirm the same of the theory of 
opposite virtues, which is certainly not Socratie, and is in- 
troduced as an unusual saying (ovk dwOora koyov ovhajx&s — 
306 b). 

Speaking generally, the most obvious affinities to Pytha- 
goreanism in Plato's later writings are, 1. An inci'easingly 
religious spirit. 2. Intense interest in all scientific inquiries, 
to which the name $iko<TO(pla x is now applied. 3. The treat- 
ment of ethical questions (as in the Philebus) from a cosmical 
point of view. 4. The prevalence of the ideas of harmony, 
rhythm, and the like, especially in their application to morals 
and politics. 

But the Socratie spirit, or rather the mind of Plato 
awakened long since by Socrates, shines through the cloud 
of Pythagorean fancies (not that these were without intelli- 
gence), and reduces them to just proportions by the dry light 
of reason, while his imagination turns all that it touches into 
gold. If we could compare the Politicus with an entire 
writing of Philolaus, Eudoxus, or Speusippus, the probability 
is that we should find the difference immense : vovv €x. 0VTas 

i-vh0V TOVTOVS jJLOl'OVS €Vpij(T€LS T&V \6yWV. 

T Tim. 88 c : novtriicrj nal -naar) (piAotrotpla. Th:a?t.i43 d : yev/uiTpiKyiv ij two 
^AXTjf <pi\o<TO(pia.y. 

*e 2 



xxviii lNTl!()!>r(TIO\ 

We now turn from these preliminaries to examine Plato's 
thoughts as they arc presented to us in this dialogue. And 
here there are three topics which chiefly call for remark : the 
fable of Cronos ; the description of existing constitutions, and, 
in connexion with this, the theory of legislation. 



III. The Myth. 

This is not the place for discussing, except incidentally, the 
nature of Plato's myths as a general feature of his writings. 
But the solution of several questions which are suggested by 
this particular talc may perhaps throw some light on the wider 
problem. 

(i) What is the motive for interrupting the argument with 
this narrative '( (2) In how far, or in what sense, does Plato 
believe in the truth of his own story ? (3) Is there any humour 
mingled with the apparent solemnity of tone ? (4) What are 
the precise ideas to whose working this imaginative creation 
is due? (5) Can these ideas be reconciled with those which 
Plato has elsewhere expressed ? (6) What eifect has the 
narration in determining the course of argument which is 
pursued in the remainder of the dialogue ? 

(1.) The chief motive of the fable is to recal the mind from 
resting in a merely abstract ideal. " We are not living in the 
golden age :" that is, in forming our conception of true states- 
manship we must take account of the imperfect conditions of 
the actual world. In order to impress this lesson, the simple 
notion of one who should feed his flock like a shepherd is 
drawn out at length, embodied in a tale, and associated with 
a state of innocence and ease, before man eat bread by the 
sweat of his brow, when all creatures lived in harmony. And 
still further to point the contrast between the ideal and actual, 
the gates of this Eden are closed by the story of a change or 
fall, not caused by any antecedent sin or curse, but by the 
necessity inherent in created things. An air of probability 
and even of historic truth is given to this strange fiction, by 
finding in it an explanation of several fragments of early 
mythological tradition. 

The Stranger admits that he has allowed himself to ex- 
tend his fable beyond what was necessary for the argu- 



TO THE STATESMAN. xxix 

mcnt. Hence there is no reason why every detail .sliouM be 
made to square with the main design. Plato, as is his wont, 
passes at once from the immediate question to the more 
general one, of which it is a part ; from the imperfect con- 
ditions of human government to the origin ami necessity of 
evil; so that the cosmical features of the myth grow out of 
proportion to the political. But the language with which 
the myth is introduced and the after-comment leave no doubt 
as to the purpose for which it is inserted. " The king, unlike 
other herdsmen, has many rivals, who likewise feed the flock." 
" The reason of this difficulty is that our definition confounds 
the king with the Divine shepherd, whereas the statesman of 
our age cannot in any sense be a nourisher of his people." 

As the tale proceeds, there is developed a further lesson : 
namely, that the simple ideal of a state of innocence is not 
only impracticable but incomplete ; that a ft Cos reAeio?, a life 
under perfect conditions, is not necessarily the happiest life. 
The question is how the life is used: the philosophic spirit 
is the one essential of true happiness : even one whose choice 
of a life has been restricted, may, if he use opportunity with 
all his might, have a tolerable existence (nal reAevrcua> Itiiovti, 
£vv I'w khop.£vu>, avvTovcos (5>vtl Ktirai filos ayairriros, ov kclkos — 
Rep. 10, 619 b) ; though if the children of Cronos used their 
golden time rightly, no doubt they were far happier than we 
can be. (Cf. Rep. 6, 497 a : 'AAAd roi, r\ 8' 6s, ov ra lAd^cra 
av hia-npa^aixzvos airaWaTTOLTo. Oiibe ye, elirov, tcl p\iyiara^ p.r\ 
Tvyuv TtoXireias irpoariKovaj-js' kv yap rrj vpoo-rjKovar] avTos re 
fxaWov av£r}(T€Tai nal juera ray t8iW ra koivol acacrei.) 

Plato has shewn in two other passages that au ideal formed 
by abstracting from existing evils is no sufficient help towards 
the conception of political or moral excellence ; that virtue is 
not to be sought in the unconscious innocence of childhood ; — 
once in describing the simple or primitive state in the Republic, 
Glaucon's " city of pigs," where " man's life is cheap as 
beast's," and again in the endeavour to conceive the origin of 
society at the opening of the third book of the Laws. But 
in the former description man needs defence against the in- 
clemency of winter, is not exempt from work, and answers to 
the definition of a cooking animal, though his cooking is of the 
simplest. In the latter the mountain shepherds whom the 



xxx INTRODUCTION 

flood of Deucalion spared to be a sort of germ of future 
humanity, living peacefully together because they bad few 
companions and there was enough for all, when there were 
neither poor nor rich, nor insolence, nor injustice, nor envy, 
but simplicity and good faith, are not set forth as an ideal, 
though they arc said to be better than men after them, but 
are pictured in order to assist the conception of the origin of 
law, by imagining a previous state of " patriarchal" govern- 
ment in which the habits and traditions of each family were 
supreme. Legislation became necessary when these clashed 
in the early life of cities 8 . 

Here, on the other hand, Plato has given his fancy free scope 
to revel in the details of a spontaneous universal life : where 
there is no unsatisfied longing, no effort, no pangs of birth, 
no crying of the infant " that he is come to this great stage 
of fools*," no old age, no flesh that sees corruption : the more 
unlike his picture is to present realities, the better he attains 
his end, by enforcing the necessity (however unwelcome, Legg. 
803 b, eon hi] Toivvv ra tu>v avOpuiroov Ttpay^aia }xzy6.\.r]s [xev 
<Tirovbf]s ovk a^ia, avajKaiov ye [j.7]v cniovhaCtiv, tovto 8e ovk 
evTvxts) of adapting inquiry as well as practical effort to the 
actual lot of man. And by adding a few extravagant or even 
grotesque touches, he gives play to his humour, and gently 
ridicules those who were content to rest in the simple unap- 
plied conception of a paternal king. 

The substance of the myth is therefore very similar to the 
remark in the Lysis : " Supposing evil to be done away, 
would there be no more hunger or thirst or anything of the 
kind ; or would there be hunger, as inseparable from animal 
life, but no longer hurtful ; and thirst and other desires, but 
without bringing harm ; or is it absurd to ask what would 
happen or not happen then, for who can tell ? But one thing 
we know, that, in our present state, hunger and other desires 
are sometimes productive of evil, but may sometimes be a 
means of good." 

(2.) A recent writer on the Myths of Plato u says not only 

6 A nearer parallel from the Laws KAadcd re not KwKvtra, Id&v aavvrj- 

will be quoted presently. Oia x&P 0V - 

* Compare with this of Shakspeare u Mr. Westcott in the Contemporary 

the fragment of Empedocles, 1. 13, Review for June, 1866. 



TO THE STATESMAN. xxxi 

that "Plato claims that his myths arc above all true in 
spirit;" and that "the central idea of the myth is affirmed 
absolutely;" but also that "in some cases the whole story is 
distinctly asserted to be historical 7 ." "He" (Plato) "dis- 
claims in fact the title Myth in a disparaging sense for the 
stories to which we now apply it. They are," he says, " real 
narratives (\6yoi) and not myths x , and where ho docs use the 
word, he still maintains the existence of a substantial basis of 
fact for such myths as admit of an historical tcst y ." The 
same writer adduces in proof of this the care with which 
Plato in the Republic apologizes for his " Phoenician lie." Mr. 
Grote in a somewhat different tone, but to the same effect, 
says of the Critias, " Plato wishes us to believe that the trans- 
action is historical. As to particular narratives the line 
between truth and fiction was obscurely drawn in his mind." 
These remarks are quoted merely to shew that it is not an 
idle question to ask, How far did Plato believe in the literal 
truth of the present narration ? 

The answer may partly be deduced from two places of the 
Republic in which Plato's own conception of the nature of a 
myth is expressed. 

a. " There are two kinds of oral instruction, one false, one 
true ; and the false must precede the true. For a fable is a 
falsehood containing truths." He then lays down the rule 
for instructive fictions, that they must convey true and just 
notions about Divine things and about human life. (Rep. 2, 

377-) 

6. And one of these true notions about Divine things is, 
that God cannot lie : amongst other reasons, because he has 
perfect knowledge, and need not have recourse to fables which 
he knows to be false, in order to gain an approximate concep- 
tion of antiquity, as men are compelled to do (ev rats \xv6o\oyiais 
hia to \xi] dhivai 07577 raA?i0e? e'xet irepl iS>v na\aiG>v a^o/xotoCiTes 
raj aA?/#ei to \j/evbos otl ixakiara, ovtco XPV (Ti l J - 0V TiOLovfxsv. Rep. 
2, 382 d). 

A myth therefore, in the Platonic sense, is a fictitious narra- 
tive, (a) conveying true ideas, and (6) in reference to occurrences 

v "See Timeeus, 20 d, 21 a,d, 26 c. * " Gorgias, 523 a. Compare pp. 

And so Critias invokes Memory to help 526 d, 527 a ; Meno, Si d, e." 
him in relating the whole story." y " Politicus, 26S e, 269 a, b." 



xx.xii INTRODUCTION 

beyond the range of actual knowledge, supplying imagined 
probabilites for ascertained facts. The latter is Plato's version 
of the ordinary function of mythology (Critias, p. no a, ixvQo- 
\oyta yap aya{iJTr)arL$ re tu>v irakaiGiv //era crxoA//? afx ZttI ras 
7ro'A.eis tpxcvdov) ; the former is the special condition or limit 
which he imposes on its nse. 

In practice this conception of the myth is further modified, 
by the dramatic and poetic form in which Plato's philosophy 
is cast. The myth in the Protagoras, for example, though 
closely parallel in some of the details to that in the Politicus, 
is meant to convey an idea which Socrates combats and which 
Plato evidently does not fully accept. So also the elaborate 
myth of Aristophanes in the Symposium contains a phase of 
thought about the origin of Love, which is afterwards glanced 
at as an hypothesis of little value (Symp. 205 e). And as the 
myth is coloured to suit the particular speaker, so it partakes 
of the peculiar spirit of the particular dialogue. We hear 
nothing in the Phaedrus about the judgment of the dead, nor 
in the Republic about the wings of the soul, nor in the Sym- 
posium about her previous existence and future life ; nor in 
the Gorgias about the edict of Lachesis. And if there is not 
perfect consistency in these greater matters, there is of course 
still more variety in the minor incidents with which Plato's 
fertile imagination when once set to work gives all the distinct- 
ness of reality (evdpyeiav) to each separate picture. The 
harmonist of Plato's myths would have a task only less 
difficult than the rationalist of the old mythology (are aypoiK<a 
Tivt crocpiq \pa>p.€vos, TroXXrjs avr<2 cr)(oXri$ Se^oret). 

But Plato, like every poet, delights in making his fiction 
as like life as possible, and amongst other artifices is the 
asseveration of the truth of what is said. When Critias calls 
Mnemosyne to his aid, or when Socrates in the boldest part 
of the Phaedrus says, " We must speak the truth, especially 
since truth is our theme 2 ," is it possible not to detect a covert 
smile? And when the speaker in the Timaeus so carefully 
traces every link in the chain of tradition by which the tale 
of Atlantis had come through Egypt to Solon, and from Solon 
to the aged Critias, are we not at once reminded of the words 

* It is of this part that Socrates is somewhat abated, eoi/ce . . . tk \x\v 
says afterwards, when his fine frenzy &AAa 7rca5iS TrrnauffQai. 



TO THE STATESMAN. xxxiii 

of Pluedrus (which by the way have reference to an equally 
circumstantial tale), "0 Socrates, you can make Egyptian 

stories or any others with equal case" ? The words of Socrates 
to Calliclcs, " You will call this a story, but I call it a true 
account," must be interpreted by the remark which follows : 
"You will despise this as an old wives' fable, and indeed it 
would be natural to despise my words, if we could find any- 
thing better or truer, but in all our inquiries this one principle 
remains firm, that Ave must fly from doing more than from 
suffering wrong •" where Socrates insists on the truth, not of 
the myth itself, but of the lesson which the myth conveys. 

It is probably from the same artistic instinct and with the 
same purpose of giving an air of probability to his inventions, 
that he founds them, as it is indeed natural he should do, 
upon the traditions already familiar to his countrymen. These 
formed the common medium through which he could communi- 
cate his ideas. He moulds them, indeed, with great ingenuity 
to his purposes. Poets had always dealt freely with mythology. 
But by appealing to the story of Atreus, or Deucalion, or 
Prometheus, for confirmation of some part of his recital, he 
seemed to bridge the gulf between the known and unknown. 

This practice, as well as the groundwork of Pythagorean 
beliefs, with which Plato had, no doubt, strong personal sym- 
pathy, gives a degree of consistency to the body of the Platonic 
myths which they would not have otherwise. And he assumes 
Such an air of simple truthfulness in telling his story, that by this 
art concealing art, a certain probability is given to the wildest 
imaginations. " Uncertainties now crown themselves assured." 

It is chiefly in the latest dialogues that the myth is seriously 
applied by Plato to the second of the two purposes which he 
acknowledges in the Republic, the reproduction of prehistoric 
events. There seems to be a transition, or growth, on the 
imaginative side of his philosophy corresponding to that 
already noticed on the dialectical side : from the abstract to 
the concrete, from vague fancies instinct with speculative ideas, 
like the procession in the Phsedrus, to supposed facts, like the 
war of Athens with Atlantis. He seeks to apply his meta- 
physical philosophy, which by this time acknowledged a prin- 
ciple of change and production, to the interpretation of the 
actual world, and he supplies the defects of experience and 
*f 



xx\.\ 1\TI!0!)!(TION 

observation by the help of imagination. Ami he claims for 
his (ales the same degree of truth which he assigns to poetry 

(Legg. 3, 682 a): Qdlov yap ovv hi) Kal to ttoltitlkw evOearrriKov 
ov yeVos virviohovv irokkow tow kcit' aXi'jOeiav yiyvo\iivi>w £vv Tim 
Xdpim Kal Moixrais er/>a7rrerai kudo-Tore. This tendency may 
be illustrated by comparing the Republic, TimsBUS, and Laws, 
of which the order of sequence is undoubted. The city 
founded in the Republic has no local habitation on earth, 
unless in some unknown and distant land, " far enough out of 
our ken/' though perhaps such a state may have existed at 
some period in the infinite succession of past time. In the 
Tima3iis and Critias this state is discovered, not far away 
in place, but remote in time, the Athens of a forgotten age 
contending successfully against a nation who were all that 
historical Athens desired to be. The state for which the 
Athenian Stranger legislates in the Laws, is a new Cretan 
settlement, imaginary of course, but imagined under the 
conditions of Plato's own time. 

To return now to the Statesman and to apply some of the 
preceding remarks to the myth before us. The main incident, 
the change on which all other change depends, is mentioned 
nowhere else by Plato. The artistic completeness and unity 
of the Great Myth is very striking. Though it differs from 
other Platonic myths, it may be said to comprehend them 
from a greater imaginative height. He speaks in the Timaeus 
of periodic destructions of life upon the earth by earthquake, 
fire or flood, and in the Laws the same thing is assumed. But 
the reverse movement of the whole universe, the relinquish- 
ment of the helm of the great vessel, and the consequent 
gradual deterioration of all things, is a conception occurring 
nowhere else. It is adopted for the occasion, for the enforce- 
ment of a particular lesson. The old fable of the autochthones 
is one which Plato delights in using. It appears in the Prota- 
goras, Symposium, Republic, Sophist, Tima3us, Critias, and 
elsewhere. But it is nowhere else imagined that men coming 
fullgrown from the earth, go backwards through the stages 
of manhood, boyhood, infancy, and so pass away. There is 
a picture of a theocracy, founded on the reign of Cronos, in 
the Critias and Laws as well as here. But here only the 
other animals are placed under Divine superintendence as well 



TO THE STATESMAN. 

as man, and a reason is given for the cessation of this form 
of government. Again, while here and in the Laws the 
Divine guidance is immediate, in the Critias, Eephaestus and 
Athena act by creating good men as legislators. These dis- 
crepancies are not greater than those previously mentioned, 
and therefore cause no suspicion of spuriousness, but they 
suffice to shew how little wisdom there would be in taking 
Plato's meaning literally; or in attributing the care which is 
taken to provide a channel through which the tradition may 
have been preserved, or the solemn air with which disbelief 
is deprecated, to anything but the anxiety of a Defoe or 
Swift to make the illusion as complete as possible. 

(3.) This leads us to the third question proposed above — Is 
there an element of humour in the fable or in the manner of 
telling it? If on other grounds we believe Plato to be the 
author of the Politicus, we can hardly doubt that there is. 
He must have felt the humorousness of making the respondent 
answer so promptly to the first statement of the astounding 
fact, " All that you say seems extremely probable ;" and he 
must have shared the amusement of his reader in contem- 
plating the dwindling forms of the earth-born race: just as 
Empedocles (however firmly he believed it) must have smiled, 
if he had any humour, at his own invention of the Kopacu 
avav)(€ves, the /3pa)^[oves evvLbes wphyv, the fiovyevr) avbpo- 
Trpoopa, and avbpocpvrj fiovKpava. Having again alluded to this 
singular passage (Polit. 270 d, e). it may be well to take the 
opportunity of explaining the motives which seem to have 
suggested the addition of this peculiar feature. It has the 
twofold effect of giving greater consistency and completeness 
to the story, and of pointing the contrast between the two 
alternate cycles. A link was needed to combine the change 
in the heavenly motion with the production of mankind from 
earth, which Plato chose, for a purpose of his own, to associate 
with the spontaneous generation of all things in the reign of 
Saturn. A hint for this appeared in the description of 
Hesiod : " They had no old age : their death was like a 
sleep/'' Now if, like the heroes of Cadmus, they rose full- 
grown from the ground, and saw not grey hairs, since their age 
could not stand still, it must go backwards. And this would 
be only in accordance with the change in the universal motion, 
*f % 



txxvi [XTHOnrCTION 

a change of ku^o-is followed by a change of yeVeo-ts. But the 
more naturally the result follows from the premises, the more 
effectively it strikes the imagination with the greatness of the 
supposed revolution. Hence it is put in the foreground of 
the picture, p-eyuarov h\ -nobe k. t. A. And here there peeps out 
a deeper vein of ironical humour from beneath the matter-of- 
course gravity of the narration. " If ever there is a beneficent 
paternal government on earth/' Plato seems to say, " it will 
be when iron swims and rivers run back to their fountains*." 
But it need not be assumed that he has no sympathy with the 
ideal at which he smiles, as being ev^decrrepov tov biovros- 
Compare Theaet. 200 b, yeWois nepio-TtpeGxnv, Rep. 7, 536 b, 
yeko'iov 5' eyvyt koi kv rw Trapovn eoi/ca imdeZv, where Plato 
openly laughs at his own enthusiasm. 

(4.) But if the myth is poetry and not history, and is even 
tinged with humour, what are the serious thoughts which this 
strange medium is chosen to convey ? There is, first, the main 
purpose which has been already described, to lift the imagi- 
nation to the conception of a theocracy, and so to remove by 
a sort of "homoeopathic" remedy the crudities of a shallow 
optimism. Very similar means are used in the Laws to shew 
that unlimited monarchy is unsuitable for the present state of 
man. But when this principal thought is once admitted, other 
reflections crowd in. They are such as the following. 

In our present state, evil is inextricably mixed with good : 
and is indeed so predominant, that God would seem to have 
left the world to itself. For in all that is created, evil is the 
necessary consequence of freedom. The practical lesson for 
man is that he too is made the guardian of his own life, and 
in conjunction with necessity, the builder of his own destiny. 
And as the universe and the animal kingdom follow, so far as 
they can recall it, the pattern of the Divine cycle, so man 
should track out everywhere the vestiges of the Divine wisdom 
which still remain b : believing, that although the Creator has 

a The notion of " a life which is a rrw/xa acpo/j-oiov/xeva. " For the child is 

gradual disrobing of the spirit from its not Plato's type of the unclouded 

earthly dress," which one interpreter reason, the " best philosopher, seer 

finds here, is well imagined, but is blest" of Wordsworth, 
surely inconsistent with the words, b '6<rov iv r]fj.?v adavacrlas evetrrt, 

" els tt)v tov veoyevovs iratSbs tyvaiv rovrq TretOofievovs. Legg. 4, 713 e. 
airtfei, Kard re ttjv ^\iv\r\v nal Kara, to 



TO THIS STATESMAN. xxxvii 

entered od His Sabbath of contemplation 1 -', His eye is still upon 
the world and all things in it, and that, being good, Ho will 
not forsake the work of His hands, but will restore His creature 

to the fulness of life and immortality in due time. 

Meanwhile we may be consoled by the reflection, that a life 
under perfect conditions is not a happy life, unless it is spent 
in philosophy, and that the philosophic spirit in whatever con- 
ditions is the earnest of happiness here and hereafter. 

Subordinate to this main argument are several incidental 
thoughts : — i. God is not the author of evil. He cannot con- 
tradict His own nature. 2. By parity of reasoning, there 
cannot be opposite Divine Powers of evil and good. (Is there 
here an allusion to Zoroastrianism ?) 3. God permits evil, as 
the inevitable concomitant of a bodily nature. 4. God is the 
only source of life and immortality. 5. In a theocracy there 
would be no laws but the Divine Will, no marrying or giving 
in marriage, for each new being would be the immediate work 
of the Divine Hand. 6. Philosophy is the interrogation of 
all natures. 7. Man in his primitive state is weak and de- 
fenceless : he receives from Heaven only such gifts and such 
instruction as are- indispensable in order that he may improve 
these by the exercise of his own invention under the stimulus 
of necessity. 8. The idea of transmigration and of the soul 
forgetting every thing at birth is assumed as a matter of 
course. It need hardly be said that all these thoughts are 
"plastic" here; i.e. they are not first thought out and then 
figuratively expressed, but emerge together with their symbols 
in the united play of reason and imagination. 

(5.) Several difficulties occur, even on the above shewing, in 
comparing the myth with other utterances of Plato, (a) Can 
this picture of the permission of evil be reconciled with the 
goodness of the Creator as represented in the Timseus ? (6) Is 
the relegation of the principle of communism to the golden 
age consistent with the fifth book of the Republic, or the dis- 
paragement of the education of perfect circumstances with the 
ideal of juowik?) in the second book 1 The answer must be that 
these views are not perfectly consistent, but that a probable 
reason can be given for each discrepancy. 

c els ttjv avrov Trepiwiryv cure'em;. 



sxxviii [NTR0DUCTI01S 

a. The Deity of the Timseus effects all without moving from 
his place, and when his commands are given "continues in the 
same stay 4 ." The Deity of the Politicus is said in ;i Rgure 
to leave the helm of the universe and retire to his speculative 
height. The Deity of the Timaeus confers an absolute immor- 
tality on the stars ; the Deity of the Politicus suffers the 
whole visible universe to totter on the verge of dissolution. 
The universe in the Timaeus, though not exempt from evils, 
as a whole is " very good/'' The universe in the Politicus 
copies the pattern of the Divine movement so clumsily that at 
length the good is almost overwhelmed by the evil. That the 
same writer could be possessed at different times with views 
so divergent, is a fact which may be classed with other " con- 
trasts of prophecy." It may be partly explained by the pecu- 
liar bitterness with which the author, at the time of writing 
this dialogue, seems to have looked upon the world. But 
there are other reasons. The motive of the piece is in the 
one case cosmological, in the other ethical : that is, the Uni- 
verse is held up as a mirror to exhibit on a large scale the 
condition of man. In the TiinaBiis therefore the ills which 
flesh is heir to have a subordinate place, in the Politicus they 
are seen in the greatest prominence ; and while in the one 
account human action is determined by physical constitution 6 , 
in the other, man, with the Universe, is left to the guidance 
of his own will. Further, the direct object of this fable is to 
contrast the actual with the ideal, whereas the purpose of the 
Timseus is to exhibit the production of the Cosmos in accord- 
ance with the idea of good. 

The music of the Tirnseus is more highly strung f , for there 
the movements of the Same and Other are combined in the 
formation of the mundane soul, whereas here the opposite 
movements take place alternately. This difference is like that 
which Plato notices between Heraclitus and Empedocles ; of 
whom the latter resolved the movements which the former 
united. (Symp. 187 a, Soph. 242 e.) At least equally discordant 
with the Timseus is the assumption in the Laws that there are 
two kinds of soul, one essentially evil, the other good : and 

d Tim. 42 c Compare the fine saying c Tim. 87 sqq. 

of Xenophanes, aAA.' enrdvevde irSvoio f crvvrovwripa. 

voov (ppevl wdvra KpaSatvet. 



TO THE STATESMAN. xxxis 

the distance between man and God is even more emphatically 
stated in many passages of this, Plato's latest writing. 

Having noticed the difference, it is right to point out the 
resemblance between the two myths. In both, God brings 
the Universe in the beginning ont of disorder into order, so far 
as this is possible for a being which has a bodily frame, though 
animated by a soul, both in the form of reason and desire. 
lie is the father, the composer, the artificer, the source of 
immortality, the author of all excellence and beauty in His 
creature. And because He is good, He will not see the disso- 
lution of that which He has made. Yet constrained by neces- 
sity, he permits periodical destructions of living creatures from 
the face of the world. 

b. The children of Cronos, like the guardians in the Republic, 
have no possession of wives and children. Here is a point of 
coincidence, and yet of discrepancy : for that which in the 
Republic is planned as a scheme possible though difficult, is 
here removed into cloud-land. In the Laws also it is reiterated 
that the community of wives and children is the condition of 
the perfect state ; but in that dialogue the laws of marriage 
are similar to those sketched out at the conclusion of this, 
providing for the intermixture as far as possible of courageous 
and gentle breeds. On this point I can only suggest a con- 
jecture. Is it possible that Plato had once hoped to see 
something like his ideal polity realized, and that his hopes 
(by the fall of Dion or otherwise) had been frustrated ? This 
would account not only for the difference in this particular, 
but also for the contrast between the hopefulness of the 
Republic and the almost despair of human nature visible in 
the Statesman. But this is a speculation to which we shall 
have occasion to return. A reason which may be assigned 
with greater safety (while not inconsistent with the foregoing) 
is the more vivid realization in this dialogue of the actual con- 
ditions of human things : and this will also account for the 
remaining discrepancy, viz. that while in the Republic great 
virtue is assigned to the "surroundings" of childhood and 
youth as a means of education, it is left doubtful here whether 
the children of the golden age profited by their opportunities 
or not. It is true that the two passages do not directly con- 
flict with each other, but the one shews a higher estimate of 



xl INTRODUCTION 

the valuo of ideal circumstances than the other. (Note espe- 
cially the words tv cua-nep iv vyieivo) tottio oIkovvtzs oi vioi faro 
irai'Tos uxpeXQvrai, biroOev av avrols emu tG>v Ka\u>v epyo)V 7) 7rpo? 
o\}/lv i] irpbs o.ko/]V tl -npoo-fiaXji, ctxnrep avpa (j)€povaa aub XP r l" 
(jtG)V TOTTOiV vyUiav, koX evdvs ck Ttaiboov XavOavrj ets o/xoidnjra re 
kcu (pikcav Kal ^vpxjmviav rw /caAw Ao'yw ayovrra — Rep. 3, 40 1 a) 

(6.) Plato often allows a theory which he has formally re- 
jected to influence the after-course of the discussion. Thus 
in commenting on the Theastetus it was observed that the 
theory of " impressions " although discarded is afterwards 
applied (209 c, Ttplv av r) o-i/xdrris avrr} btacpopov tl p,vr\\x^iov 
Trap" 1 qjiol €va-rnxr}vap.evr] K<na6r}TaL) : and in the Republic the 
ideal of a simple life, which Socrates rejects in order to humour 
Glaucon, and to account for the existence of a warrior caste, 
insensibly returns. It might be thought that when the tale 
was ended, and the error of " too great simplicity s " corrected, 
we had done with the Divine Shepherd. But the idealizing 
impulse is too strong. YVe have turned our faces resolutely 
to look for the Statesman amongst mankind. But the light 
which accompanies the search is from a higher world. And 
when in comparison with the vision which our eyes have seen, 
the actual statesmen of the earth appear contemptible or 
monstrous, there still rises before us, in addition to the six 
forms of government which experience recognizes, a seventh 
form, which is no other than the Divine image 11 . The scenery 
of the myth, the alternate cycles, the periodic destructions 
from physical causes, the earth-born race, are as though they 
had not been, but the ideal of true sovereignty still flits before 
the eye of the mind 1 . This ideal, however, is now connected 
with the postulate, that Statesmanship is a science, with which 
the dialogue began : and it is sought to realize this with some 
reference to the existing conditions of human society. 

First, the actual forms of government are shewn not to be 
based on any principle of reason ; yet it is assumed that, so 
far as they are constitutional, they are unconsciously imitating, 

s €vr}9€<TTepaTovSeovTos. Polit. 276 e. cipit se dormire, timet excitari, blan- 

h Compare Descartes, Meditatio 1, disque illusionibus lente connivet, sic 

sub fin. " Nee aliter quam captivus, sponte labor in veteres opiniones." 
qui forte imaginaria" libertate fruebatur ' Compare the middle and end of 

in somniis, quum postea suspicari in- the Phsedrus. 



TO THE STATESMAN xli 

though with decreasing accuracy (here the influence of the 
myth appears again k ), that Divine pattern of which the 
sovereignty of knowlcdgo would be a conscious and perfect 
imitation. Now a perfect imitation is no longer an imitation, 
but the thing itself : and thus we return to our ideal image. 
But this ideal is no longer merely abstract. The king as a 
commanding artist is seen purging the community of incurably 
bad elements, subduing tho refractory, and ordering aright 
the diversities of excellence which exist amongst his noblest 
subjects. His function is defined relatively to that of the 
general, the judge, the orator; and the result of his rule is 
not described as perfect happiness, but such happiness as is 
possible for a community. The separation of Divine and 
human which the myth suggests, is for the first time carried 
out consistently in the Laws 1 , where the acknowledgment 
reluctantly muttered out in the Politicus is fully made, namely, 
that a paternal despotism has only once been realized, viz., 
in the golden age when man lived under a theocracy; but 
that human nature under existing conditions is too weak to 
bear the temptations incident to absolute power. 

IV. The Seven Forms of Government. 
The subject of political constitutions is treated differently by 
Plato in the Republic and the Laws. In the Republic the 
ordinary threefold distinction of oligarchy, democracy, and 
despotism is put into the mouth of Thrasymachus, who argues 
from this that the strongest govern for their own ends. Plato 
himself appends to his picture of the perfect state an ideal 
picture of four successive forms of gradual deterioration from 
this type, timocracy, oligarchy, democracy, and tyranny ; each 
lower than the former, and arising out of it through a natural 
development of evil. The ruling principle of the first is 
honour, of the second Avealth, of the third individual freedom, 
of the last passion. This arrangement is no doubt partly 
determined by the analogy of the individual, which, in accord- 
ance with the plan of the dialogue, is throughout kept promi- 

k Polit. 273 b, Te\evTa>y 5e a/x&Xii- pressed in the Laws is the religious 

repov. counterpart of the severance of the 

1 4, 713. The sense of the distance ideal from the actual which is so 

of man from God so frequently ex- strongly felt in the Politicus. 



xiu (vntonucT'- 

nently in view. In the timocracy, wliich nearly corresponds 
to the Laconian ideal, the spirited clement gains predominance, 
and is emancipated from the control of the reason. In the 
other three forms,, Desire, first, of wealth, secondly, of unre- 
strained action, thirdly, of gratifying the ruling passion, has 
the upper hand. 

Three distinct arrangements are adopted in different places 
of the Laws, all different from that just mentioned : — 

i. The order of historical development. Legg. 3, 676-683. 

a. Single families, without written laws. 0e/Lucrrevei 5e 

e/caoros Tiaiha>v ?}8' ako^u>v o£S' a\Xi]\a)v aKeyovaup. 

b. Patriarchal Government, Bao-i\eiW Tjaaav Smclio- 

TaT7]V. 

c. The early life of cities, in which opposite customs are 

harmonized by legislation. 

d. Maritime cities are built ; the beginning of commerce, 

war, sedition. 

e. Return of the Heraclids. Laconian and Cretan con- 

stitutions. 

2. Two prime forms, democracy and monarchy, representing 
the tendencies of the West and East. The best constitution 
must have an admixture of both, so as to secure order and 
liberty. The Laconian and Cretan settlements had this good 
fortune. Legg. 3, 691. 

3. For the above-named reason, these alone of existing 
governments deserve the name of noXiTda. The four com- 
monly named, royalty, aristocracy, democracy, and tyranny, 
are not constitutions, but factious coteries (oracncoreiai), which 
govern, not for the interest of the state, but, as Thrasymachus 
said, for the maintenance of the existing authority. The only 
true constitution is that in which, instead of one part of the 
city being in subjection to another part, all are together 
subject to the rule of reason in the form of law. 

In the Politicus we have first an enumeration of the forms 
of government according to common notions : then a criticism 
of these, followed by a fresh enumeration. 

Common opinion is said to acknowledge five forms instead 
of the three vaunted by Thrasymachus in Rep. bk. 1. Instead 



TO THE STAT sliii 

of his "tyranny" we have the higher generalization of mon- 
archy (tho word twvapxia occurs only in the Folitieus and the 
Laws). This is subdivided into royalty and tyranny, according 
as the subjects are Avilling or unwilling. Instead of his 
"aristocracy" we have the more general ?} ittb twv 6kLyu>v 
hwaaTtta, (cf. Legg. 7 10 c, okiyapyjia ri]v tov tolovtov, i.e. tov 
vofJLoOerov, yivzcriv yakenuiTaTa bvvaiT b.v irpocrbtgacrOai' irkeurTot. 
yap Iv avr% hwacrrai yiyvovTCLi) : which is divided, according to 
the principle of wealth on tho one hand, and constitutionalism 
on the other, into oligarchy and aristocracy "of fair name" 
{ti]v ev(avvp.ov). The fifth is democracy, which, whether ruling 
by gentleness or violence, and whether constitutional or not, 
has the same name. 

But when tried by the standard of scientific government, 
not one of these is found to be based on principle : they are 
seen not to be forms of government at all (ov TroAireicu), but 
only imitations more or less remote of the one true form ; 
and the men who head them are not statesmen, but partisans, 
the phantom-guardians of phantom-states. 

Of the imitations however, some are better, some are worse. 
And here a principle is admitted which had no place in the 
perfect state. The better or worse of the bad states are 
distinguished by the observance or defiance of law. All else 
is accident, except the original wisdom of the Laws, and the 
degree in which they are obeyed. Hence the original classi- 
fication is thus modified. First, the scientific state is alone 
allowed the name, so that the five are swallowed up in one 
(to, nivTG dvojjMTa tG>v vvv keyopiivaiv TtokiTuG>v £v p.6vov yiyovev)- 
But of the false states there are now 

1. Monarchy with law, 2. Monarchy without law, 

called fiatnXtta. TvpavvCs. 

3. The dynasty of a few 4. The dynasty of a few 

observing the laws = defying the laws = 

apio-TOKparia. okiyapyjia. 

5. Democracy with law. 6. Democracy without law. 

The true state being kept apart, &<rnep 6tbs e£ cwOpwrnav, 
the following is the order of excellence, or rather of com- 
parative badness amongst the other six : — 

* o' 2 



xIin INTRODUCTION 

1. fiacnXeLa ( i ). 

2. apLCTTOKparia (3). 

3. hrnj.0Kpa.TLa p.€Ta vopnav (5)- 

4. h-jp-OKparla tu>ev vopcav (6). 

5. oAr/apx''" (4)- 

6. tv pawls (2). 

Now this order differs at the first glance in two important 
respects from that given in the eighth and ninth hooks of the 
Republic. These are, first, the addition of /3ao-i\eta as one 
of the lower forms, and, secondly, the depression of dkiyapyj-a 
below br]iJ.0KpaT[a. 'Ayoioro/cparta may be allowed to correspond 
to the TifioKparCa of the Republic. But it so happens that on 
both these points there is a corresponding difference between 
the Republic and the Laws. For in that dialogue, as we have 
seen, j3ao-iKe(a (a sort of eastern monarchy is probably intended) 
is one of the four forms commonly received to which the Athe- 
nian Stranger denies the name of constitution. And demo- 
cracy, as one of the two " mother polities'''' of which monarchy 
is the other, is throughout placed before oligarchy, against 
which Plato seems latterly to have conceived an increased 
enmity. (Even in the Republic he calls it o~vxvG>v yipiova-a 
KaK&v 7roAtreta.) 

When we add to these two points the coincidences of 
language above mentioned {p.ovapyj-a, hwaaTeia), a presump- 
tion is raised that the doctrine of the Politicus on this subject 
is nearer to the Laws than to the Republic. 

And on coming a little closer, we see that in the Republic 
these distinctions are thought to depend on essential differences 
of form (4, 445 d, dbrj fyovTes ; 8, 544 d, rj ti$ ko\ iv dbet 
bia(pavet tivi Ketrcu), and to have a natural order of sequence 
of which a reason can be given. But in the Politicus they 
are seen to be distinguished by no principle, the only real 
difference between states being first enlightenment or igno- 
rance in the ruler, and next the maintenance or the neglect 
of law. And not far removed from this view, though more 
adapted to a legislative treatise, is the assertion in the Laws 
that the constitutions commonly so called are not constitutions 
at all, and that the only true state is that where reason rules 
in the form of law. Once more, when in the Politicus the 



TO THE STATESMAN. xlv 

statesmen of existing states are said to be not what they pro- 
fess, lmt partisans (otj ttoAltlkoi d\\a o-raa-taortKot), this comes 
very near the remark in the Laws that the radical vice of all 
the received forms of government except the .Spartan and 
Cretan is that one part rules the rest for its own advantage. 
They arc not constitutions but coteries (ov 7roAiTe«u, dAAa 
o-rao-twreiat) . 



V. Theory of Legislation. 

The presumption thus raised is further confirmed when we 
examine the very curious piece of mingled satire and inquiry in 
which the distinction between constitutional and unconstitutional 
government is illustrated. " If the true sovereign and law- 
giver, or a second like him, were on earth/' we are told, " he 
would be above law ; which is only an imperfect substitute 
for the universal and immediate superintendence of the Per- 
fect Will/ - ' The physician is not bound to follow his old pre- 
scriptions under altered circumstances. But now he is " gone 
into a far country/'' or, as the myth would say, Providence 
has left us to ourselves : and men have despaired of finding 
their natural ruler, whom, when once found, they would follow 
like a swarm of bees. Therefore there is nothing left to them 
but to preserve their country's laws, which, it may be pre- 
sumed, were made at first after the Divine pattern, so far as 
those who framed them knew. What a poor business this is 
at best is shewn by the case of an imaginary state, in which 
the arts of navigation and medicine or any others should be 
practised according to ancient laws enacted in popular or 
oligarchical assemblies at the advice of chance persons. But 
w T hen the wretchedness of such a condition has been fully 
exhibited, a lower deep is opened, by imagining a state, 
whether democratical, oligarchical, or tyrannical, in which 
such laws, however imperfect, should be over-borne, not by 
higher knowledge, but by private gain or favour. Hence 
it is concluded that in the absence of a philosophic ruler, the 
best course possible (as a hzvrtpos nXovs) is a strict observance 
of the laws. Now in the Republic, the sanguine founders of 
that city in the heavens deliberately dispense with a minute 



xlvi INTRODUCTION 

code of laws. These aro thought unnecessary because in the 
greatest thing, viz. education, the whole community will be 
spontaneously obedient to the philosopher-king, and in little 
things those who have been thus educated will bo a law to 
themselves ; or in any case will be only what education 
makes them. The pages in which this thought is expressed 
(4, 423 e — 427 a), had they not been found in an earlier 
writing, might have been taken for a criticism of the Leges. 
It is indeed granted, in words which should acquit Plato of 
Utopianism (5, 472 b — 473 b), that practice can never attain 
to the perfection of theory, but the idea of lowering the sails 
of theory, in order to try a second course, when the first 
is hopeless, does not occur to Socrates, and certainly would be 
very far from acceptable to the impetuous Glaucon. 

The necessity of this humbler course is somewhat sadly 
admitted by the Athenian Stranger in the Laws. He prefaces 
the introduction of the very class of regulations (those which 
are over and above the rules for nurture and education), 
against which Socrates protests in the passage above quoted 
(9, 875 a), with the remark that laws are necessary, because 
no human being has at once the wisdom to see, and also the 
power and the will to do, at every moment what is for the 
universal interest, and to make his own interest always 
secondary. " Could one be found theoretically convinced that 
whatever was for the public good was on the whole good 
for him, yet, if placed in a position of absolute and irrespon- 
sible authority, he would be too weak to apply his theory 
consistently through a long life. His mortal nature shrinking 
from pain and desiring pleasure would darken his judgment 
of what is just and good. But if Providence were to send on 
earth such a nonpareil, whose nature was sufficient for this 
work, he would not need to place himself under the control 
of law. (Compare Polit. 295 b, (rx°^V <*v kavTu Oeir e/x7ro8tV- 
juara ypd(p(av tovs Xe^Oivras tovtovs vop.ovs.) It is because 
Nature has been so niggardly in this particular {vvv h\ — ov 
yap Zcttiv ovbapov ovbap-m, aAA' rj Kara (3pax.v) that we are 
forced to adopt a course which is only second-best, in enacting 
laws, whose application is general only, not universal." 

The reflection which prompts these words, viz. that prac- 
tical rules must be accommodated to our experience of human 



TO THE STATESMAN. xlvii 

weakness, pervades the whole dialogue, and should always be 
present to the reader of the Laws. It docs not follow that 
Plato has relinquished his ideal of life, because in recommend- 
ing a second-best polity to those who have refused his best, 
he admits some details which he had once rejected with 
scorn m . The feeling with which he does so could not be more 
clearly expressed than in the words with which he defends 
the admission within certain limits of election by lot: to yap 

€TTL€LK€S KCtl £vyjV(s)}XOV TOV TtktOV KCU (XKpl.(3oVS TiapCL hUl)V T1]V 

6p0i]V eort TrapaT£0pau(xeVoi', orav yiyvrjTai n . 

This procedure follows naturally as a practical result from 
the reasoning in the Politicus. If, seeing that the philosopher- 
king cannot always be with his people, the only wise course for 
states is to maintain their laws, which have an imperfect and 
remote reflection of principles of divine government: suppose 
an occasion to arise for founding a new state, or some rare 
opportunity for remodelling an old one , what are the laws 
which, as the best possible substitute for the continual presence 
of an enlightened will, the true law-giver would actually 
impose? and what are their reasons and their sanctions? 
This is the problem which the Stranger in the Politicus im- 
plicitly suggests, but apparently despairs of answering : for 
the sketch with which the dialogue ends represents the highest 
statesmanship working without the instrumentality of law, 
though in a more practical way than in the Republic. 



m See esp. Legg. 5, 739 b : rb 5' states built on foundations which 

iartv opBdrara, el-rrelv /xev r-qv apiari]v reason pronounces ruinous, provokes 

TroAireiav kizI Sevripuv Ktxl Tpiri^v, 8ov- the reflection "what strength and 

vat Se elir6vra aipeaiv ktt&VTcp t£ t?/S tenacity there is in the very nature of 

crvvotKTicrtcos Kvp(w. a state" (&is i<rx u P^ v TL ""<^'S itrrl 

n Another admission to which he <pvcrei). 
confesses himself almost driven (4, ° This in the Laws is not the rise 
708 e) is, that " constitutions are not of a philosopher-king, but the con- 
made, but grow" (us ovSeis irore currence of a well-disposed and intelli- 
avQp&irwv ovSev vofx.o9ere7, rvxai 8e gent despot with a wise law-giver. It 
ical ^v/xcpopal iravroiai iriirTovaai irav- should be observed that a provision is 
toi'ois vofxoOeTovvt to. TravTo. rjjj.7v). A made in Legg. 6, 769, 77° ( c f- I2 > 
noticeable passage, in which human 951), though by no means an adequate 
art occupies only the third place with provision, for the constitutional amend- 
Providence and chance. There is an ment of the law. This is a step in 
approach to a similar feeling in Polit. advance of the political doctrine of the 
302 a, where the longevity of many Statesman. 



xlviii INTRODUCTION 

An instructive parallel to the teaching of the Politicus 
on this subject appears in the Critias, in which three phases 
of political life arc described, which nearly exemplify the 
Elcatic Stranger's theory. First the people of prc-historic 
Athens, whose autochthon founders, created by Hephaestus 
and Athena, had been inspired by them to order their state" 
(as wc learn from the opening of the Timasus) in accordance 
with the provisions of the Republic. Next the kings of the 
race of Poseidon, each of whom had power of life and death 
in his own city, but was bound in his intercourse with the 
rest to obey the injunctions of their progenitor, as these had 
been recorded by the first of their race. These had remained 
unaltered as they were written in the beginning on a tablet 
of orichalcumi (a now fabulous metal which abounded in that 
realm). On this tablet was added a great curse pronounced 
on those who disobeyed: and a great oath, confirmed by the 
blood of a bull poured over the tablet, was renewed every five 
years : at which time also, in solemn nocturnal conclave, they 
condemned those who were convicted of ruling contrary to 
the laws. For many generations, so long as they observed 
these laws, and while the heroic blood remained in therm 
they lived happily enough, and perceiving that virtue is the 
true road even to earthly welfare, they bore up against the 
load of their material prosperity. But a time came when 
the human element prevailed and they were overcome by 
ambition and the pride of power. Then they seemed out- 
wardly most fortunate, but presented a pitiable spectacle to 
those who had an eye for deformity of soul. The fragment 
of the Critias ends with the resolve of Zeus to chasten them, 
but had the tale proceeded, we should have had placed 
before us the third companion picture, that of the misery of 
a state which, in the absence of a philosophic ruler, has a 
code of laws but is disobedient to them. These three con- 
ditions, set forth in the Critias, correspond nearly to the forms 
which the Politicus recognizes as alone essential : the Republic 
is ignorant of the distinction between the second and third : 
which, again, are brought into almost exclusive prominence 
in the Laws. 

p Critias, 109 d. 1 Compare the Kvpfeis of Polit. I. c. 



TO TIIH STATESMAN. 



. VI. Relation of the Politicus to the Leges. 

I. The description of the "Royal web" in the concluding 

passage of this dialogue is a more outline; yet if the sketch 
is anywhere finished this is not done in the Republic, but in 
the Laws. These both contain the idea of binding together 
and harmonizing the gentle and fierce elements in human 
nature: and the presence of this thought in the Politicus is, 
in so far, only a reason for grouping it with these two great 
works rather than with the Protagoras or any of the more 
Socratic dialogues, in which all virtue is simply referred to 
knowledge. But a more definite hypothesis is justified by 
a closer inspection. For, while the "divine bond" of know- 
ledge is a description so vague as to be equally applicable to 
either of the two imaginary schemes of education, the provisions 
respecting marriage which constitute the " human bonds " 
have no counterpart in the Republic, while they are re- 
peated almost without modification in the Laws. They 
imply in fact an accommodation to the existing condition of 
mankind which is more in accordance with the spirit of the 
latter than of the former dialogue. For "what need was 
there of uniting by mutual pledges those who never spoke of 
"I" or " mine/'' and who felt every grief of every member 
of the state with an individual sorrow? What need of 
qualifying opposite tendencies by intermarriage, when each 
individual, according to the principle on which he was selected 
and trained, had by nature and education the harmony of 
gentleness and courage within his own breast? This ideal 
polity is still acknowledged by the speaker in the Laws to be 
the one and only pattern. His object is to propound a second 
polity, i. c. a polity only once removed from the former, the 
closest imitation of the perfect government that is likely to be 
maintained without the presence of a succession of Divine 
kings. And his procedure, with the reasons for it, has several 
striking points of resemblance to that suggested at the con- 
clusion of the present dialogue. 

He observes that the purpose of the early legislators was 
not war, but peace as the reward of virtue : that in the early 
*h 



1 INTRODUCTION 

life of cities it became necessary to bring together the opposite 
qualities of gentleness and fierceness, which, during the patri- 
archal period, had become embodied in the traditions of the 
different clans. (3, 681 b, KoapLKoTepaiv p.\v KocrpLutrepa, kol 
avhpiK&v avhpiKwrtpa. Cf. ib. 691 e, of the Spartan constitu- 
tion. Compare Polit. 310 c.) And in beginning his own 
legislation he compares the work he has to do (almost in the 
words of our dialogue) to a web composed of a warp and woof, 
of which the warp is stronger and so far better, having a 
certain firmness of disposition, but the woof is softer and has 
" a certain temperance which gives it smoothness." (Cf. 
Polit, 282 e, 309 b. In the Laws the highest rule is given 
to the stronger element.) But there is an earlier process to 
be gone through before this is begun. The state must be 
purged of all bad elements. Plato thinks worse of human 
nature than when he hoped that all children under ten years old 
with a few exceptions would receive the print of the new laws. 
(Rep. 7, sub. fin.) The purgation of the flock from tainted 
members must precede all else. If the legislator have supreme 
power, human kindness need not prevent him from taking the 
nearest way. Otherwise he may have recourse to the more 
" euphemious " plan of emigration. (5, 735. Compare with 
this Polit. 293 d, e, 308 b-d.) 

Once more, in applying the ideal which annihilates indi- 
vidual choice to the matter of marriage, this exhortation is 
made to precede the law. " The man must choose a partner 
not superior to himself in wealth : and, moreover, he who is 
conscious of a quick and forward spirit (trajuwrepoy ajj.a /ecu 
Oclttov tov biovTos irpbs Trdcras ras -npageis (pe.p6p.evov) should 
seek alliance with a family of gentle blood (Koo-piioov -naripav 
ylyvecrOai KTjSeor?^) : and he of the opposite temper should 
take the opposite course. For each should choose that 
marriage, not which is most pleasant to him, but which is 
most expedient for the common weal. Now natural inclination 
carries men to mate with their likes : the result of which is 
to accumulate differences both of fortune and character, to 
the manifest harm of cities. The motive of our injunction is 
that the state may be like a well-attempered bowl, in which 
the wine sparkles with maddening heat, but is chastened into 
smooth mellowness by the sober influence of a different power.'" 



TO THE STATESMAN. li 

(^» 773-) ft would be superfluous to draw out at length the 
many close resemblances between this passage and p. 310 of 
the Politicus. 

2. The affinities of thought and doctrine, as well as of 
language, which we have found existing between this dialogue 
and the Laws, make it probable that the times of their com- 
position were not very far apart : and Socher's objection, that 
the Politicus agrees neither with the Republic nor with earlier 
dialogues, is met by the hypothesis that this dialogue is inter- 
mediate between the Republic and the Laws. To this, how- 
ever, it may be again objected, that while the Politicus and its 
immediate predecessor, the Sophistes, are amongst the most 
dialectical of the whole series, the very notion of dialectic in 
the Platonic sense is absent from the work on which the last 
years of Plato's life were spent. Nor is this peculiarity of his 
latest dialogue wholly to be accounted for by the nature of 
the subject. Although the method of the Republic is less 
exact than that of the Sophist or Philebus, yet the ideal 
theory which it contains is professedly made the groundwork 
of the political fabric, and Dialectic, as the science of ideas, 
and as the roof and crown of the sciences, which are them- 
selves viewed in their ideal aspect, is described as the in- 
dispensable completion of the education of the ruler. Nor yet 
will this further explanation suffice, that the Laws profess to 
take a lower ground and starting-point, and to provide only 
for what is second-best : and that hence, in the education of 
the vono<pv\aK€s, the principles of the highest method are 
economically withheld. For no one can read the tenth book 
or the latter part of the seventh book of the Laws without 
perceiving that here at least the law-giver is enunciating what 
he conceives to be the highest truths. Yet, while much is 
said of geometry and astronomy, and of the supremacy of 
mind, no hint is given, either here or in the previous reference 
to the Republic and the communion of goods, of any " doctrine 
of ideas/' Notions of astronomy and psychology, more or 
less definite, asserted with religious warmth, appear to have 
taken the place of metaphysical inquiry. The exoteric form 
of the discussion, implying a wish to reconcile philosophy to 
Greek feeling, is inseparable from the phase of thought which 
prompted this desire. 



lii INTRODUCTION 

But while nothing is said of the ideas as objects of know- 
ledge, there remain frequent traces of the method of division 
and combination (bLaipccns, (rvvayo>yr)) as pursued in these dia- 
logues. The duty of dividing according to the natural kinds 
is enforced in the following, amongst other passages : 2, 658 a, 
pi] Tayy to tolovtov Kptvwfxev, dAAa btaipovvres avrb Kara p.ipr] 
iTKoiru>\iz.Qa: 6, 751 a, bvo tlbi] ravra irepl 7roAireia? Koop.ov 
yiyv6p.zva Tvy\avti : 7, 814 e, bvo p.\v avTijs elbr] ^pj) vop.t(eiv 
ilvai .... Kal -nakiv tov (jiavkov re bvo Kal tov o-novbaiov bvo 
crepa : 10, 895 d, eari ttov Si^a biatpovpevov Iv aAAoi? re koI 
iv apL0p.<2: 12, 944 b, ay^ebbv ovv ii> toIs oveibeaiv e'xet Tiva 
Topvi]i> 7} tovt(i)v tG>v dvop.6.Tu>v £iri(pop&, where the phraseology 
of the Sophistes is repeated. Instances of the converse process, 
by which things apparently diverse are brought under one 
conception, are 7, 824 a, the description of the various kinds 
of OriptvTiKr}, which has several points of resemblance to these 
dialogues ; 8, 841 c, 'kv yivos ov, irtpikafibv ra rpia yevrj : 
10, 894 b, &)? kv elbecri Xafie'iv : 12, 944 c, Kaipol Awews veW r\ 
(&OV TLVOS, OVS ZVTOVOVS T€ Kal VlTO&pLaTa Kal vevpoov Z-kitovovs, 
piav ovcrav (pvatv bLeo-napixivqv, ttoWcl^ov ttoXKoIs 6v6]j.aaL irpoa- 
ayopevovo-Lv. Much also of the terminology which arose out of 
the definitions of these dialogues is assumed in various places 
of the Laws, as has been sufficiently shewn in the General 
Introduction. 

The anomaly which we are considering will appear less 
wonderful, if we review the course which dialectical inquiry 
has taken in our two dialogues. The chief result of the 
Sophistes was the transition from a somewhat fanciful onto- 
logy to a true psychology, from a transcendental to a logical 
conception of Being ; first as the sum of positive determina- 
tions, then as the sum or ideal of true determinations, 
whether affirmative or negative. We have seen that this 
conception finds legitimate development in the Politicus in 
more complex views of knowledge and of the objects of know- 
ledge, which must be seen in various aspects and relations 
before they are fully known. The true affinities and discre- 
pancies of things are perceived by the higher faculty of the 
mind, not after a cursory glance at phenomena, but through 
a laborious process only made possible after long training. 
Science is the comprehension of these deeper resemblances 



TO THE STATESMAN. liii 

and differences: and scientific inquiry is the interrogation of 
all nature in order to discover what each kind can contribute 
to the store of universal knowledge. Tho only passages which 
remind us of the ontological or transcendental theory of the 
ideas are the /xerpLov (jiwij in p. 284, and the contrast between 
sensible and logical analogies in p. 286 a. Now the former of 
these is the exact expression of the philosophy which seeks to 
combine the absolute with the relative, as Plato seeks to com- 
bine these in the Philebus ; and the latter belongs to the 
antithesis between the things of mind and of sense, which is 
nowhere more strongly asserted than in the tenth book of the 
Laws. Even the ideal standard of to /uirpioi; is hardly con- 
ceived as existing apart from production (284 d, -npbs Tip rod 
fxerpLov yivecnv). Indeed, throughout the dialogue (see also 
Soph. 245 d) the Eleatic opposition between Being and Be- 
coming, and also between Knowledge and Opinion, appears to 
be softened, and even here and there obliterated. 

There is a sense, therefore, in which it may be truly said 
that, in these dialogues, metaphysical inquiry has been en- 
gaged in " getting rid of metaphysics/'' i. e. of transcendental 
ontology. The idea of scientific method takes the place of 
the mere enthusiastic exaltation of the ideas. That method is 
still held to be the privilege of a mind fitted by nature and 
training to discern ideas ; to discern them, however, not merely 
in themselves, but amidst the manifold complexities of the real 
world. 

Hence we need not wonder that in a dialogue later than the 
Politicus, the notion of an intellectual region, wholly separated 
from that of appearance and opinion, which stands out so 
prominently in the Republic, does not reappear. 

It is true that the chief interest in the Politicus is dialectical, 
in the Laws ethical and religious. But this, at all events, may 
be traced partly to the difference between a speculative and a 
practical treatise. As Plato himself says of his ideal state, 
(JMjauv eyet Trpa^LV \e£ttos t/ttov dArj^etaj itpdirTecrOaL. There is 
an analogous contrast between the Phasdrus and the Republic. 
In the infancy of the sciences, the development of a perfect 
method, and its application to a particular subject-matter, were 
achievements equally impossible. Practice and theory could 
not go hand in hand. As the method was necessarily immature 



liv INTRODUCTION 

(though rich in anticipative insight), so it was destined to 
remain unrealized. Plato often betrays his consciousness of 
this. He fails to seize "waking" the form which he had 
pursued "in a dream." At the same time it is not contended 
that the Politicus may not have been produced many years 
before the Leges were begun. In that last dialogue the 
method of inquiry which, theoretically at least, still rules in 
the Statesman and Sophist, has given place to what is virtually 
a method of exposition ; and the author's mind seems in both 
cases to be wholly possessed by the impulse which is dominant 
for the time. It is hardly credible that two such different 
modes of handling the same subject should have reigned 
simultaneously, and therefore it is best to suppose an interval. 
But this supposition does not weaken the force of the cumu- 
lative arguments by which it has been now sought to deter- 
mine approximately the relative position of this dialogue 
amongst the writings of Plato. And in the occasional 
abruptness and absence of connexion in the Politicus there are 
not wanting symptoms of the approaching loss of dialectical 
as well as of artistic freshness and power. 



VII. References to the Politicus in Aristotle. 

That Aristotle was acquainted with this dialogue appears 
from many coincidences of thought and expression. Several 
instances, chiefly from the Politics, will occur in the notes. 
(See especially, besides the passage mentioned below, Ar. Pol. 

I, i, oool [xev .... [XLKpav ttoXlv (cf. Polit. 259 a — c) : ibid., 
ayeXaiov (coov : ibid. 2 sub fin., rj be kti^tlki] OrjpevTLKrj : 

II, 5> °^ ov laTpiKT) djuoiws £x etv ( c ^ Polit- 298) : ibid. 7, 

to /x?/ Kara ypappiaTa frpyeiv, aXX' avToyi>(6p,ovas, iinacpaXes : 

III, 2, "Ecrri yap apxv becrnoTLKij biaKOVMas -npageis (cf. 

Polit. 259 c — 260 c, 304) : ibid. 6, larpos b" 1 . . . . rots dbocnv 
(cf. Polit. 259 a) : ibid. 8, axnrep yap debv ev avOpcairoLs (cf. 

Polit. 303 b) : ibid. 10, bone? brj toXs vop.i(ovo-i apyziv 

rj\i0Lov: IV, 12, apxp-s XeKTeov Tavras, oaais a7roSeSorai fiovXev- 
oacrQai re Ttepi rtvoov Kal Kplvai koI k-nira^ai, nal jwaAicrra tovto, 
to yap l-niTo.TTt.lv dpxtKwrepoV Igtiv (cf. Polit. 260 a) : VII, 13, ei 



TO THE STATESMAN. lv 

ixkv toLvvv apxtw kciI upxeaOat (cf. Polit. 301 d). It is 

true that, considering the common atmosphere of philosophical 
debate which surrounded both writers, these resemblances do 
not amount to proof; but they render it probable that Ari- 
stotle had read the dialogue and was familiar with some of its 
contents. Hence it is the more strange that in the one place 
in which he appears to refer directly to the Politicus, he not 
only omits the author's name (this would be no new pheno- 
menon), but gives him the vague designation ns t&v irpoTepov, 
"one of those who have preceded me." The passago occurs 
in the second chapter of Book IV, where the question is 
raised, which of the declensions (7rapeK,3dcreis) from the true 
forms of government is the least bad ? and is as follows : 
lieTpiooT&Tiiv be ti]v brjpoKpariav. 7/877 p.ev ovv tis a-necpijvaTO kcu 
ray irporepov ovras, ov fx-qv eh tolvto fiXexjms i]\uv e/ceiros p.ev 
yap expive, iraaQv p.ev ovcruv e7neiKcoi>, olov 6\iyap\(as re XPW 7 ^ 
/ecu tu>v aXXav, xeiplaTriv h-jp.OKpaTiav, (pavXtav be apicrTi]v. The 
superficial relevancy of this to Polit. 303 a, b is sufficiently 
obvious. We may notice, however, that, as usual with him in 
quoting Plato, Aristotle has forgotten the connexion. Plato 
condemns as strongly as Aristotle all the forms of government 
here mentioned. With him also it is a question not of good 
and bad, but of degrees of badness : rls — tS>v ovk opO&v ttoXl- 
TeiG>v tovtoov {JKLcrra xaXeTir) wCv v > Tia-v&v X a ^ €7T ® v ovacov, kcu 
tls (3apvTarri ; — and it may be that Aristotle's three "right 
forms" would have fared no better at his hands. The word 
eirieiK&v, which Aristotle attributes to him, is not used at all ; 
the nearest approach to such an expression is Koaixiav, which 
is explained by vofxifjL<ov, and is probably used, as /^erpicoTOTTiy 
is used by Aristotle, in order to avoid a word implying posi- 
tive excellence. For when monarchy is said to be apiarr] twv 
e£, and democracy i:apav6p.(i>v /3eArioT77, this is only in the 
same relative sense in which Aristotle uses the words cpavXcov 
apia-Trjv. Indeed, were Aristotle's representation true, the 
two philosophers would be more nearly at accord : for demo- 
cracy would then be described by Plato as the least bad of 
three bad forms, each of which is (in this case) the declen- 
sion from a species of right government. This kind of inac- 
curacy is too common to afford any ground for the con- 
jecture that Aristotle is not referring to the Politicus, but 



hi INTRODUCTION 

to some other writing or utterance of a previous thinker' 1 , 
but it lessens the wonder which is naturally excited by the 
careless vagueness of the expression " some one in former 
time." 

When we consider how much more Aristotle seems to have 
relied on the living tradition of Plato's school than on his 
writings for the opinions of Plato; how lax he is in quotation 
generally, attributing to Circe the words of Ulysses to his 
pilot, and the like ; how impersonal he is ; how seldom he 
names Plato, though often alluding to him ; when we re- 
member that in all his writings there is no distinct reference 
to such a noticeable work as the Parmcnidcs, w t c need hardly 
be surprised if, at the moment of writing these lines, he was 
not clearly aware which of all the previous speculators on the 
subject of politics had pronounced this opinion. It would be 
easy to indulge in further conjecture, but it is needless. The 
anomaly remains. The fact is singular, though not unaccount- 
able. But, if what has been said in these pages has any force, 
this would indeed be slender evidence on which to question the 
genuineness of the Statesman. This dialogue is fastened by 
too many threads of contrast, as well as of resemblance, to the 
place which has been now assigned it in the Platonic canon, 
to be dropped from thence by the mere negligence of Plato's 
younger contemporary r . 



VIII. The " Philosopher " dialogue. 

The " Statesman" contains a sketch of the real as well of 
the counterfeit ruler. The " Sophist" was mainly occupied in 
proving the existence of a counterfeit of the philosopher. The 
last and (according to the "geometrical" proportion indicated 
in Polit. sub. init.) by far the greatest part of the Stranger's 

<l This view is, however, worth con- r I cannot think that Ueberweg has 

sidering, and is somewhat favoured by made out the theory which he advances 

the expression tis tSiv irpoTepwv. In in connexion with this question, viz., 

this case, Plato might be included in that when in a quotation of Plato 

Vfuv, and Aristotle might, as in so Aristotle uses the past tense he always 

many other instances, be merely repeat- alludes to a spoken utterance, 
ing a doctrine of his master's. 



TO THE STATKSM \\ lvii 

task remains: viz. the definition of the true philosopher. 

That Plato intended to complete this series with a dialogue 
in which the Eleatic Stranger and Therotetufl should he the 
interlocutors and Socrates the listener appears from the 
opening sentences of the " Statesman'''' compared with Soph. 
217 a, 231 a(?), 253 c, 254 h : although in the two last-named 
passages it is possihlo after the fact to detect a tone of hesita- 
tion (eav (r)rSiiiev, av hi /SovAo/xeVots r/jiuv ?]). No such dialogue, 
however, and no mention of such a dialogue is extant, and it 
is next to impossihlc that a picture of the ideal philosopher, 
drawn by Plato's hand, should never have received a passing 
notice in all literature. But it has been supposed that 
although not literally fulfilled, the intention here expressed 
may have been carried out by Plato in a different way. It 
was the opinion of Schleiermacher that in the Symposium and 
Phoedo the promised portrait of the philosopher is given to 
us in the person of Socrates. It is unnecessary to refute 
at length a supposition so gratuitous. The reader of the 
preceding pages will perhaps be satisfied with the remark, 
that even were the withdrawal of the person of Socrates of no 
significance, and could the artistic freshness of Plato's literary 
prime be recalled at will, we cannot suppose that after writing 
the Sophistes, he would have returned to the phase of the 
ideal theory which is implied in Symp. 211 c, d, or in Pha3do 
75, 100. More plausible but not less baseless is the opinion 
of Stallbaum, who finds the missing dialogue in the Parme- 
nides. If it were necessary to make the hypothesis at all, 
there is no dialogue which could more fitly be drawn into 
this group. It contains a criticism and modification of Eleatic 
doctrine which presents many analogies to the Sophistes, 
and if, as the Politicus teaches, human things are only worth 
studying for the sake of dialectical improvement, no better 
training than that given in the Parmenides could be desired. 
Yet this is regarded by the speaker as a preparatory exercise, 
and the result is negative merely. The Parmenides is de- 
structive in the same sense in which the Theaetetus is destruc- 
tive. Now it is very improbable that after giving a definition 
of the Sophist and the Statesman with which the speakers 
appear satisfied, Plato would have added to these a sceptical 
solution of the problem, " What is the philosopher ?" Some 



Iviii INTRODUCTION 

glimpses of a positive answer to this question are in fact 
afforded us in Soph. 230, 253-4. I am inclined to think, 
as has been hinted in the Introduction to the Sophist, that 
the most natural place for the Parmenides is between the 
Therctctus and the Sophistcs : and, at all events, that the 
difficulties respecting the coexistence of the ideas with phe- 
nomena, of the One with the Many, probably preceded the 
solutions of these and cognate difficulties in the Philebus and 
Sophist. 

It may therefore be concluded that Plato's " Philosopher," 
like Bacon's sixth book of his Instauratio, was never written. 
It is idle to conjecture what, if written, it would have con- 
tained. But we may be sure that a truer conception of its 
intended scope may be gathered from the few brief hints given 
in these dialogues than from the Symposium, Phaedo, or 
Parmenides. 

The chief problem which these hints suggest to us is the 
nature of Being, conceived as the true combination and 
separation of ideas (Soph. 254). Plato perhaps intended to 
draw out at length the notion of dialectic, as he has briefly 
sketched this in Soph. 253 d, 259 c, d, Polit. 285 a-c. He 
clearly implies that it would be necessary in order to this 
end to establish an idea of order or fitness (to ixirpiov). And 
other metaphysical conceptions would doubtless have emerged 
in the attempt to determine that, which Plato felt to have 
so often escaped him, a perfect method (wpos ttjv Trepl avrb 
rctKpt/3e? kirlhei^iv — Polit. 284 c). That this endeavour would 
have occupied the main portion of the dialogue there can 
be little doubt, and perhaps as little that the arid wastes 
of abstract discussion would have been relieved by passages 
of luxuriant beauty, in which the glory of the Philosopher 
(now T finally distinguished from the Sophist and Statesman, in 
whose likeness he had often appeared) would have been fully 
declared, and the life which surveys from on high the lives 
of men (Soph. 216), conversing with every creature to learn 
what each has to tell of wisdom (Polit. 272 c), would have 
been stripped of all ironical disguise and revealed in true 
proportions to the discerning spirit. 

Even these scanty indications of the intended scope of the 
Philosopher perhaps betray one cause why such a dialogue was 



TO THE STATESMAN. lis 

never written. To elaborate a perfect method of knowledge 
in the infancy of science was impossible, and it may be that 
Plato felt it to be impossible". Nor does it seem as if in any 
age the mind of Plato could have found completeness or repose. 
The ideal of science 

. . . "is an arch, wherethro' 
Gleams the untravelled world, whose margin fades 
For ever." 

And if our hypothesis of the comparatively late origin of 
theso dialogues is correct, the non-appearance of the Philo- 
sopher coincides with and renders more significant the aban- 
donment of metaphysical inquiry in the Laws. 

s " Res et suprk vires et ultrh, spes nostras collocara." — Bacon. 



nOAITIKOS 



ta tot AiAAoror nposmiA 

2QKPATH2, 0EOAOPO2, 3ENOS, 
20KPATH2 O NEQTEP02. 

257- 11 7ro\\r)v yapiv 6(pelXco croi rrjs QeaiTrjTov yvoopl- 5 
crecos, co Qeodcope, a\xa koll r?;y tov ^evov. 

0EO. Ta^a 8e ye, to ^cofcpare?, ocpeiArjcrei? two- Only a 

, , y , N , , third part 

Tr)? TpnrAacnaV) eirecoav tov re ttoAltlkov carepya- of our task- 

, v r , is done : 

(TtOVTOLl aOL KCU TOV (pLAOCTOCpoV. nay, not a 

20. JUleV' OUTGO TOUTO, CO (j)l\e Qe68cOp€, (fir/ao/iev 10 the States- 

» r 9 ^ v . \v\ man rises 

aKt]K00T€? eivai tov Trepi AoytapLov^ koii to. yeco/xe- above the 

\ / Sophist in 

TplKCL KpClTlCTTOV; value and 



5. *H — ££vov\ " I owe you a 
thousand thanks, Theodoras, 
both for the acquaintance I 
have made with Thesetetus and 
with the Stranger," ttjs Qeai.Tr]- 

tov ajaa Kal rrjs tov £evov. Cf. 

Theset. 145 c, d, Soph. 216. 
yvaplfa does not occur in Plato 
in the causative sense. Hence 
the noun probably does not 
mean " your making me ac- 
quainted." 

7. Taya 8e ye] "And pre- 
sently you will owe me three 
thousand." The argument of 
the Thesetetus is not taken 



into the calculation. This helps 
to confirm the hypothesis that 
there was a considerable inter- 
val between the composition of 
the Thetetetus and that of the 
Sophist. But perhaps it is 
only natural that the speakers 
should not refer immediately 
to the conversation of the pre- 
vious day. Cf. infr. 258 a. 

1 1 . aKrjKooTes elvai] The more 
frequent use of the auxiliary 
verb has been already noticed 
as a peculiarity of Plato's later 
style. 



2 



IIAATQNOS 



the Philo- 
sopher 
above the 

Statesman 
in more 
than a geo- 
metrical 
ratio. 



GEO. Owe, co *2coKpar€? ; 

20. Ttov uvSpcov tizacTTOv *6ivT0$* Trjs terms' atjlas, 
oi rfj TLfxrj irXeov [aXXr/Xcov] u(j)e(TTCicTii> ?; kclto. Ti]v 
dvaXoyiav ti]v rr/9 v/JLerepas Te^vt]?. 
s GEO. E?3 ye vri tov rj/ierepov 6eov, co ^LcoKpare?, 

TOV "A/JL/ULCOVa, KOU SlKaLCO?, KOLL TTO.VV fieV 0VV fXVY}pLOVL- 

kcos hrejrXrj^ds ploi to irep\ tovs XoyicrpLOvs dfiap- 
Tyfia. kcu ere pcev dim. tovtcov elcravOis p.ereLp.C av 
8' rjpiiv, co Ijeve, pLrjSapicos aTVOKapx^s yapi^opLevos, dXX 
oetjr}?, etre tov ttoXltlkov dvSpa irpoTepov elre tov 
(piXocrocpov irpoaipei, irpoeXopLevo? die^eXde. 

SE. TavT, co QeoScope, 7roir)Teov iirearep anatj 
ye eyKe^eiprjKapiev, ovk dirocrTOLTeov irp\v av avTcov 



p. 2< 



2. Tav dvSpoov] Cf. Soph, 
221 d: rjyvorjKapev Tavftpos tov 
avdpa ovra gvyyevr). The ideal 

Sophist, Statesman, Philoso- 
pher, are treated with fami- 
liarity, as persons with whom 
a transaction is being held. 

2. *&Vro S *] All the MSS. 
have Bevres, but the correction 
of Heindorf is unquestionably 
right. The corruption is pro- 
bably due to uKrjKooTes preced- 
ing. 

Note the variety of expres- 
sion in df-ias — TI/J.TJ. 

3. ifkeov — depeardo-tv^ Cf. 
Legg. 4, 722 b : ov dnrXa 6a- 
repa rav irepcov hia<popa povov 
els dperrjv ttjs ypetas. dWrjKcov 

om. Bodl. An. 

4. ttjv Trjs vpeTepas Te'x*"?s] 
Sc. Tt]v yecopeTpiKrjv. 

5. tov rjptTepov 8ebv — tov Aju.] 
The reader is thus reminded 
that Theodoras is from Gy- 
rene* 

6. Ka\ irdvv pev ovv pvrjpovi- 

kw?] " And most certainly 



with praiseworthy recollection." 
Theodoras commends Socrates 
as his pupil for remembering 
the principle of geometrical 
proportion. 

8. kol ere pev] "Well, I must 
seek some other opportunity 
for my revenge." 

9. xapi£6pevos] The word re- 
cals the politeness of the first 
interview, Soph. 217c: tt\v ye 

7rpa>Tr]v alTrjaavTcov X^P iv ' lb. d : 
to S' av crol pfj x a P L C*°~6ai nal 
roTcrSe. 

d\\' igijs, etre] For the in- 
terruption of the sentence with 
etre, cf. Theset. 156 e : XevKov, 
etre £v\ov, etre ~\ido$ k.t.A. 

12. TTOLrjTtov — aTrocrrare'oi/] For 

the apposition, cf. Protag. 348 

a : TOVS TOLOVTOVS poi SoKet xPV vat 
IAip.elo~6ai epe re nal ae, KaTaOepe- 
vovs tovs TTOirjTas avTovs 81 rjpmv 
auTOiv tovs \6yovs TroielcrBai. The 

inferior MSS. insert ko.\ before 
ovk, probably from conjecture. 

1 3. avTcov] " The matters in 
hand." Compare the frequent 



riOAITIKOS. 



Tirpos to re'Aos 1 eXdcofxev. aAAa yap irep\ Qeam-jTov 
TovSe tl XPV $pav fie ; 

GEO. Tov wept ; 

3*E. AiavaTravacopev avTov /x€raAa/3cWe? avTov 
tov avyyvfivao~Ti]v TovSe Sco/cpar?; ; ?; ncos crvpfiov- { 
Xevei? ; 

GEO. Ka.da.7rep elrre?, fieTakd/ifiave' veco yap 
ovTe paov olaeTov iravTa ttovov dvaTravo/ievco. 

20. Kal flTjV KLvSweveTOV, CO ij€l>€, a/JL(j)Q) iroOev 

i/xol ^vyyeveiav eyeiv Tivd. tov fiev ye ovv vp.el.9 
Kara ttjv tov TrpoacoTrov <Pvaiv o/iolov epol (j)aiveo-0ai 
(paTe, tov 5' rjptv rj KXrjcrc? oficovv/io? ovaa Kal rj 
irpoo-prjcris irape^eTai Tiva olKeioTrjTa. dec 8r) tovs 
ye fjvyyevei? r)p.ds del irpoOvpcos Sid Xoycov dvayvco- 



It in time 
that The- 
Betetua 
shoul'l be 
relieved : 
and hia 
compa- 
nion, the 
younger 
Socrates, 
who has 
hitherto 
°been a 
silent lis- 
tener, is 
now encou- 
raged by 
his elder 
namesake 
to converse 
with the 
Stranger. 



use of avra without a distinct 
antecedent in Thucydides. 

4. AiavaTravo-copev avTov] "Shall 

we relieve him for awhile, by- 
taking his comrade Socrates 
here instead 1 ?" Either Theae- 
tetus was to be the respondent 
in the " Philosophus," which 
is probable enough, or 81a here 
receives something of the mean- 
ing which it has in Bia8ex.opai, 
" in turn." 

5. trvyyvfivavrrjv\ Theaet. 1 44 
e : av 8" apa rt roiovrov ye'vrjTai 
(sc. r<» prjKei irava>v a^Gaipai^ Kai 
rovhe Trapa\T)-*\t6i.u8a ~2asKpa.Tr), tov 
ScDKparovs pev apmvvpov, ipbv he 
7)AiKiu>Ti)v kcu o~vyyvpvao~Trjv, 0} 
avvSiairoveiv per epov to. 7roWa 
ovk dr)des. The word here, like 
navTa tvovov below, implies men- 
tal as well as bodily labour. 
Cf. Eep. 6, 498 b : ■Kpo'iovo-rjs 

he tt)s r)\u<ias ev j} r) "^v^r) reXet- 
ovo-Qai apxeTai, iniTeiveiv to. eKei- 
vtjs yvpvao-ia. 



7. veu> yap 6Vre] We per- 
ceive in Theodorus something 
of the consciousness of the 
contrast between youth and 
age, which appears also in the 
Eleate and in the Athenian 
Stranger in the Laws. Cf. 
Theaet. 146 b, 162 b. 

9. nodev] " From some cause 
or other," " in some respect." 

10. tov pev ye — olKeioTrjTa] 

There is a sort of humour in 
the conscious technicality of 

the language, (cpvo~LV — (patveadai 
— K\r)cris — opwvvpos — Trpocrprjo-ts 

— oixf toT?jra,)which also reminds 
us that we are engaged in dia- 
lectic. 

11. opoiov epoli] Theagt. 143 e. 

12. r)plv] The plural gives 
a more courteous turn to the 
expression. The dative, al- 
though governed by 6pa>vvpo<; — 
oUeioTrjTa, has something of an 
ethical force. Cf. Soph. 216 e. 

14. dm Xoyuv] " By means of 



The latter 
at once re- 
sumes the 
leadership 
of the dis- 
cussion, and 
prescribes 
the States- 
man rather 
than the 
Philoso- 
pher for 
the next 
subject of 
definition.' 



The States- 
man, also, 
like the 
Sophist, is 
a man of 
art, and the 
arts and 
sciences 
must be 
again di- 
vided. 



4 I1AAT0N02 

pi&iv. QeaLTi]TU) pev ovv civtos re crvvf.p.L^a yOes p. 25 
8id Xoycov kou vvv dia]Koa d7roKpivap.evov, ^.coKparovs 
oe ovberepa' del 8t aKe^/aaOat kou tovtov. tfioi p.ev 
ovv elaav0L9, <roi Se vvv diroKpLvlaOu). 
5 HE. Tavr eo-Tcu. 'O 2to/c/3are?, aKoveis Srj 
^GJKpdrovs ; 

NE02 20. No*. 

HE. 'SvyxojpeL? ovv oty Xe'yei ; 

NE. 20. Yldvv /JL€V ovv. 
iq HE. Ov rd ad kcoXvelv (fjalveTou, Set oe 'laco? en 
rjrrov rapid SiaKCoXveiv. dXXd drj p.erd tov o~o(f)i- b 
crr-qv dvayKaiov, d>9 ip.o\ (palverai, tov ttoXltlkov 
avdpa Siatr/relv vav. koli p.01 Xeye, irorepov tcov 

i7TLO-T1]p.6vOJV TLV rjpUV KOU TOVTOV $€T€OV, Y) 770)? ', 

15 NE. 20. Ovtcds. 

HE. Tec? einaTrjiias apa StaXrjTTTeov, wcnrep rjvLKa 

TOV irpOTtpOV io-K07T0VfJL€V \ 

NE. 20. Tax av. 

HE. Ou p.ev Sr) Kara tovtov ye, co ^coKpare^ 
20 (f)a[veTal pot Tp.rjpa. 



argument," i. e. as to their men- 
tal qualities. Cf. Theset. 145. 
Socrates here shews the same 
urbanity as in the opening of 
the Thesetetus and Sophist. 
Compare with the structure of 
the sentence and the introduc- 
tion of the minor premiss with 
Sij (Bel 8)7) Theset. 143 d : ao\ 
drj ovk oXiyiaroi TrXrjO-id^ovat — 
ei 8fj ovv fjbecos av ttvOol^v, 

And for ye, resuming what has 
been already said, cf. infr. 260 c, 
deo-rro^ovrd ye. 

12. tov noXiriKov] Bodl. A, pr. 
n, ttcXltixov tov. This illustrates 
a frequent source of corrup- 



tion in MSS., the inversion of 
the order of words. 

14. The requirement that the 
king shall be eTTLo-TTj/icov tivos, 
the possessor of a perfect 
science, is upheld throughout 
the dialogue, and hence the 
definition of the king excludes 
all the actual rulers of existing 
communities. The question in 
the text is asked not without 
ironical allusion to this " crowd 
of satyrs and centaurs " (infr. 
303 c), whose art, like that of 
the Sophist, proves to be a 
mere sham. 

Ka\ tovtov] " As well as 



riOAITIKOS. 



258. 



NE. ID. TifLrjv, 

£?E. Kar aAAo. 

NE. 20. "Eolk6 ye. 

S"E. T?)j> ow ttoXltlkt]V drpairbv 7rfj T19 avev- 
pr/aei ; 8ei yap avrifv avevpelv, kgu x^P^ a<peXoi>Tos 5 
airo 7W aXXcov Ibeav amy \xlav iTrKJCppayuraaOai, 
Ka\ Tals aXXais exTpoirals ev aXXo eibos eiriarifiriva- 
jxevovs Tracras ras i7rtaTr)fjLas cos* ovcras Svo eldj] 81a- 
voijOrjvat tt)v ^/v\tjv i]\x r 2v woLrjaai. 

NE. 212. Tour' rfSr) crop, olfiai, to epyov, a> ijei/e, 10 
aXX ovk kjiov ylyverai. 

HE. Act ye /j.r)i>, co ~2c$KpaT€9, avrb elvai /cat ar6i>, 
orav £fjL(f)ai>€? tj/jlIv yevrjTai. 



the angler (Soph. 219 a) and 
the Sophist (lb. 221 c)." 

1. Ti fxrjv] "What then]" 
This less frequent signification 
of tl fiTjv probably contains the 
explanation of the general use 
to signify assent. " What else V 
= "surely." Cf. Parm. 139 d: 

"On ovk €TT€i8av tcivtov yevrjTai 
tco ti, £i> yiyverai. 'AAXa ti pr)v; 
k.t.\. The&'t. 142 a : nov pr)v } 
4. aTpair6v~\ The Stranger 
recurs to the metaphor "which 
he employed in Soph. 222 a. 
This appears clearly from the 
word eKTpo7rah, which recals e<- 
Tpen€<r8ov (I.e.) Compare Phosdo 

65b: Kivdvvevei toi iho-rrep arpenros 
tis rjpas eK(pepeiv ev rfj aKe^ei, on 

k.t.X. The art is identified with 
the method of finding the art. 

7. rais aXKais eKTpoirais — 

iroirjo-ai] This is an applica- 
tion of the lesson learnt in 
the previous dialogue, that for 
every positive conception there 
is a corresponding negative 
expression not signifying tbe 



opposite, but including all that 
is other than the positive no- 
tion. See esp. Soph. 257 e : 

aAAo ti rSiv ovtuiv tivos yevovs 
dcpopiadeu K.a.1 Tipos ti tuiv ovtcov 
irakiv dvTireSev ourcu ovpj3aivei 
elvai ti to pr) kci\6v • The mind 
is here viewed as giving her 
impress to objects, and not as 
receiving impressions from 
them (contrast with this the 
image of the waxen block in 
the Thesetetus). Similar lan- 
guage occurs in Phredo 75 d : 

nepl aTtavTcnv uls eiTiacppayi^o- 
peOa tuvto o eo~Tiv, Cf. also 

Soph. 253 d. 

8. a>s ovaas 8uo eidrj] As 
constituting two classes or 
kinds. 

12. kci\ a6v] I.e. You must 
make the distinction your 
own, go through the process 
for yourself. In his more 
systematic dialogues Plato still 
insists on the importance of tbe 
learner's following every step 
of an inquiry. 



Tly wliat 
path, then, 
does the 

- 

diverge 
from the 
bi aten way 
of know- 
Led -','■ in 
general ? 
It is the 
duty alike 
of ques- 
tioner and 
respondent 
to deter- 
mine this, 
while part- 
ing off all 
other by- 
ways, and 



6 



nAATONOS 



stamping 
them with 
a sing le 
negative 

form. 

The theory 

of numbers 

is an ex- 
ample of a 
class of 
sciences, 
in which 
knowledge 
is wholly 
separable 
from ac- 
tion. 

Whereas in 
carpentry 
and other 
handi- 
crafts, 
knowledge 
is bound 
up with 



NE. 20. KaAwy tines, p. 25* 1 

SE. ' Ap OVV OVK dpi0fl7]TlKrj peV KCLL TlVeS €T€p(XL 

TavTr) avyyevels riyyo.i \J/lAou twv Trpdijecov eiai, to 
8e yvwvai irapecr^ovTO povov ; 
5 NE. 20. "Ear us OVTCOS. 

aE. Ai 8e ye wepl t€ktovlkt)v av koll avpiracrav 
■yeipovpyiav dairep ev tolls Trpd^eaLV evovcrais avp(f)u- 

TOV TYJIS eTTLaTrjprjV KeKTrjVTCLL, KOLL (TVVOLTTOTeXoVO-L tol e 

yiyisopeisa vir clvtcqv aiopaTa, irporepov ovk oistol. 
10 NE. 20. T/ firju ; 

3(E. TaVTYj TOLVVV (TVpJTT 0L(T0L9 iTTLCTTrjpaS BldipU, 

tt)V peis 7rpa.KTiK.rjv TrpoatLTTCDV, tyjv 8e povov yvco- 

(TTLK7\V. 



2. apidjirjTLKT] fJL€U — fiovov] 

This in modern language is the 
distinction between science and 
art. Cf. Phileb. 56, 57. 

3. ■tyihai rcov Trpd^eu>v\ " Dis- 
engaged from pi-actice," i. e. 
abstract. The same word is 
used, infr. 299 e, to distinguish 
" pure arithmetic" from geo- 
metry and astronomy. apidp.7]- 
tiktj (the theory of numbers, 
not arithmetic in the modern 
sense, which more nearly an- 
swers to Xoyia-TLKrj,) is always 
spoken of by Greek philosophers 
as the most abstract of the ma- 
thematical sciences. E. g. Ar. 

Met. I. 2 : al e£ eXarrovcov — tcov 
sk 7rpo(rde'(T(a>s, oxmep dpi6p.rjTiKr] 
yeaiperplas. Again, in Theset. 
165 a Dialectics are opposed, 
as yf/ikol Xoyoi, " mere abstrac- 
tion," to mathematics gene- 
rally. 

4. TTapeaxovTO ] For this 
'poetical' use of the aorist, 
cf. TheaBt. 156 d: iyepero — 
7Tepuirkrj(T6rj, and note. 



6. At 8e ye — KeKTrjvrai] " But 
in the case of carpentry and 
the sister arts, and of every 
handicraft, the knowledge is 
as it were merged or inherent 
in the operations ; and they 
assist in perfecting the struc- 
tures which result from them." 
Note the expression al (rexvai) 

eTVLO-Trjprjv KeKTijvTai. By a fu- 
sion of abstract and concrete 
common in these dialogues, 
the attributes of the artist 
are attached to the art. Cf. 
Phileb. 41 e: el to ^ovkt]pa — 
j3ov\erai. 

8. avv(nroTe\ovo~i\ Sc. tri/v 
rals npd^eaiv. wr avTwv, SC Tap 
irpa^euv. 

9. yiyvopeva — tvpoTepov ovk 

ovtcl\ Whereas the objects of 
the abstract sciences are never 
produced, but exist always. 

12. tj]V peu] Sc. emo-Tr/pr)!', 
i. e. twv eTno-TT)p.S>v ei8os. This 
helps the transition to the 
singular eVicT^s in what fol- 
lows. 



nOAITIKOS. 



259- 



NE. 20. "ElTTCO (TOl TUvO* 0)9 flLOLS €TTiaT1]pr/S 

rrjs oA?;y ei'5/; 8uo. 

£,E. YloT€pOl> OVV TOV TToXlTLKOV KOU fiuaiXtU KOU 

SeaTTOTi-jv Ka\ er olK.ovop.ov drjao/xcp go? lv iravra 
ravra Trpoaayoptvovres, ?; Tooravra? re)(ua? auras 
elvai (j)6)fiev, oaairep 6vop.ara eppr}0ij ; MaXXov 8e 

fXOl SevpO €7T0V. 

NE. so. n^ ; 

£?E. Tjjde. ei tco tls twv Sr/fiocrievoPTov larpcou 
'iKavos ijvfLJ3ovA€V€iv 18lcot6vcol> avro?, dp ovk dva- 
yKalov avTw 7rpoaayopevea0aL rovvop.a r-qs Tiyyrjs 
ravrou oirep q> avfi^ovXevet ; 

NE. 20. W. 

SE. TV 5'; oar is fiacriXevovTi \wpas dv8p\ ira- 



hihJ imme 

!y a-> 

pro- 
dactLon. 
Sci( ace, 

Hi. li. Lb 
either prac 

ileal or 

5 theoi 
'1'.. which 
branch 
does the 
Statesman 
belong 1 
Or, let us 
first ask, 
Arc S 
man, King, 

IO Master, 
House- 
holder, the 
sune or 
difFerent in 
respect of 
science ? 
One who is 
competent 



3. Horepov ovv k.t.A. ] This 
question is closely connected 
with the one in hand. If 
government is an abstract 
science, then the conditions 
under which it is exercised 
and the number of the persons 
to be governed cannot alter 
the principles of government : 
and, conversely, if the prin- 
ciples are thus altered, it is 
not an abstract science. 

4. Kal er oIkovojjlov ] en 

marks that this is an extreme 
step. 

6i]0~opev — 7rpocrayopevovTes ] 
The participle, although re- 
quired to balance the clause 
after the introduction of iravra 
ravra, is redundant, as in e'977 
\iya>v. 

ei> TTavra ravra] Cf. Phileb. 

25 d, alib. 

6. MaAAov 8e poi 8evpa e7rou] 

This is a natural touch. The 
Stranger feels that the ques- 



tion has been put too ab- 
strusely for his young re- 
spondent. 

9. driiioa-ievovratv] " Practis- 
ing physicians." The 8r)pio- 

epyos is opposed to the iStcori]? 
(01 8i]pioepyol i'a(Tiv, p-avriv r\ 
Irjrijpa kcikcov). Cf. Al\ Pol. III. 
6 '. 'larpos 8' ore 8r]piovpy6i Kal 
6 dpx'.TexToviKos Kal rptros 6 ne- 
Trai8evpevos rrepl rr\v re)(VT]v. 

10. up' ovk] " Is it not in- 
evitable that he should have 
the same professional designa- 
tion with the man whom he 

advises 1 ?" rovvopa tJ}? T€\vtjs 
(cogn. accus. after Trpoa-ayopev- 
eo-8ai) is added for the sake of 
greater precision. It appears 
from the Gorgias, p. 455 b, 
compared with Xen. Mem. IV. 
2, 5, that certain public medi- 
cal officers were appointed by 
the ecclesia of Athens. Stall- 
baum thinks that these are 
meant by the Srjpoo-ievovres 



8 



FIAAT0N02 



to advise :\ 

physician 

deserves 
the name of 
Physician, 

whether he 
practises or 
iidt. So one 
who can 
advise 
a king, 
though he 
may hold 
a private 
station, is 
a king in 
knowledge. 
Hence the 
Statesman 
is a kinar. 



paivelv t)eivos lSioott]? u>v avro?, dp ov (f)r)aop.(i' e\€W ]». 9 
avrov T)]v e7ri(TTy)fJU]v iju e'Sei rov apypvTa olvtov kck- 
TrjaOat ; 

NE. 20. $rjo-on€v. 

HE. 'AAAa fxrjv rj ye aXrjOivov fiacriXeojS fiacre- h 
Xlky) ; 

NE. 20. No/. 

SE. Tavrrju 8e 6 KeKTTjp,evo9 ovk, av re ap^cou av 
T idicoTrjs a>v rvyyavrj, iravrois Kara ye rrjv re^y-qv 
avrrjv $o.(Jl\lkos 6p6(os Trpoap-qO-qaeTai ; 

NE. 20. AiKaiov yovv. 

iHE. Kai jirju oiKovofxos ye kou becnroriqs tolvtov* 

NE. 20. Ti firju ; 

HE. Ti 5e ; pieydXrjs a^qp-a OLKrjcrem r/ crfiLKpas 
av 7roXeco? bynos p-cov ti 737)09 apyrjv hiolaerov \ 



larpol, but it seems more 
probable that the distinction 
meant here and in Gorg. 514 
d is simply that between one 
who practises and one who 
does not practise as a phy- 
sician — the professional and 
the amateur. This is quite 
sufficient for the requirements 
of the argument. For the form 
of expression, cf. Gorg. 474 c : 

Ti fie 8rj a'ia^iov ; ttotsoov k.t.A. 
5. >7 y e ~] >3c. eiTKTrrjfir]. 

8. TavTTjP fie 6 KeKTT/^eVoy] 

Note the emphatic position of 

TaVTTJV. 

9. Tvyxdvrj is emphatic : 
" Whether it be his fortune to 
i"ule or to enjoy a private sta- 
tion." 

Kara, ye ttjv rk\vr]v avrr\v\ 

Compare the distinction in 
Republic B. I, between the 
ruler so-called, and the essen- 
tial ruler: esp. 1, 345 c. 



10. /3ao-i>.iKo'f] "Fit for so- 
vereignty," whether actually 
sovereign or not. 

14. peyakrjs Bioicrerop] The 

Politics of Aristotle (I. 1.) open 
with a criticism of this saying, 
in which it may be observed 
that tbe limitation expressed 
in the words irpbs dpxrjv is. 
overlooked. The difference of 
view, however, is real and 
characteristic. As in defining 
the Good in the Eepublic,- 
Plato refers all to a single 
principle, while Aristotle holds 
that the idea of Good is dif- 
erent in different things ; so 
in the present case, while Plato 
asserts that the idea of Go- 
vernment must be the same 
in the case of a house and 
a city, Aristotle contends that 
a house is essentially different 
from a city, because composed 
of different elements (the in- 






nOAITIKGS. 



9 



259- NE. 20. OvSe'v. 

c aE. Ovkovv, o vvv 8r) 8ieaKoirovp.eda, (fxzvepov uj? 
eiricrTypi] p.la ire pi iravr earl ravra. ravrijv 8e elre 
(3acri,\iKi]v elre ttoXltlki]v elre oiKovopiKTjV tis ovo- 
pioc^ei, p,r]8ev avrcp 8ia<fiepu>p.e6a. 5 

NE. 20. Tiydp ; 

fiE. AAAa p.rjv ro8e ye 8i]Xov, coy (3acriXevs airas 
X e P (TL KaL ^vpLiravTL rco cra>p.aTi apLiKp arret, els to 
Kare^etv ttjv ap^rju Bvvarai irpo? tt]v ttjs ^XV f 
avveaiv kcu pcopirjv. io 

NE. 20. Ai}Xov. 

SE. Trj? 8rj yvuxTTiKris paXkov y rrjs yeipoTexyL- 
kyjs kcu oXco? irpaKTLKrjs fiovXei tov fiaaiXea (j)cop.ev 
d oiKeiorepov eivai ; 



dividual being the unit of the 
family, and the family of the 
state), and hence the science of 
the management of each must 
be different also. They may 
be compared analogically, but 
must be carefully distinguished. 
The point is illustrative of the 
difference between the Plato- 
nic and the Aristotelian ova-la, 
— the former tending towards 
an abstract unity, the latter 
towards concrete definiteness 
and reality. Cf. Ar. Pol. III. 
9. The Platonic view had a 
germ in Socrates. See Xen. 
Mem. III. 4, 12 : fj yap tg>v 

18icov emp.e'Xeia TrXrjdei povov 8ia- 

(pepei ry~js rdv koivcov. Cf. Legg. 

3, 68l : plav oIkiov koIvtjv Kal 

peyaXrjv dnoTeXovvres. lb. 1,626 

c, 690 a; [Erast. 138 c ;] Meno 
73 a ; Rep. 9, 578 d. 

(14.) o-x'JP-d, The word sug- 
gests the imposing appearance 
of a stately mansion. Cf. 



Eurip. Ale. 911 (of the palace 
of Admetus) : <S ayjipa 86pav, 
7T(os elae'Xdco ; 

(ig.) noXems oyKos] So, with 
a different shade of meaning, 
Eep. 2, 373 b: (17 ttoXis) oyKov 
epTrXrjarea koi ttXt]8ovs. 

2. 6 vvv drj SieaKOTTovjieda] 

df} is omitted in one MS., Ven. 
2, and Si in another, Par. F. 

6. Tt ydp ;] " Why should 
wet" 

7. as fiaatXevs anas] Cf. 
Ar. Pol. VII. 3 : ravri-jv be ttjv 
irep\ rdvayKala Xeyopeva noielv 
e7rlo~Tuo~dai tov ap-^ovra ovk dv- 
ayxalov, dXXa xpr)o~dai paXXov' 
Barepov be Kal dvbpa7robcbbes. 

I 2. paXXov — otKetdrepoi'] Cf. 
Pep. I, 331 c: ev dvff evos ovk 
iXd\(Larov e-ywye delr/v av els 
tovto ttXovtov )(pr]o~ip.G>TdTT)v elvat 

— where the measure of compa- 
rison is at some distance from 
the adjective, as here. 



And he 

bouse v.. II 
haa tlio 
HruiK- art of 
govern- 
ment which 

man has. 
Therefore 

these forms 
of art or 
science 
differ only 
in name. 
And it is 
clour, at all 
events, that 
the royal 
function is 
a work of 
mind. 
Kingcraft, 
or State- 
craft, then, 
is a theo- 
retical 
science. 



10 



FIAATON02 



Now 

theoretical 
science is 
not one 
entire and 
perfect 
chrysolite, 
but divides 
into Criti- 
cal and 
Command- 
ing. 



NE. 20. 17 pr)v ; P- 259 

SE. Tr)v apa ttoXltlki]v koll ttoXltlkov kou fiacri- 

XiK)]V KOLL fioXTlXlKOV €LS TOLVTQV 0)9 tV TTO.VTa TLXVTa 

5 NE. HO. AtjXov. 

HE. Ovkovv TTopevoineO* av eijr/9, d fierce Tama 
ttjv yvcocrrLKrjv SiopL^olfJieda ; 

NE. 20. Udvv ye. 

HE. Yipoae^e 8rj tov vovv, av apa iv amy} two. 
10 8ia(fivr)v Karavo/jacofiev. 

NE. 20. <S?pa(e iroiav. 

HE. ToidvSe. XoyuiTLKr) ttov tls r]puv tjv riyyr\. e 

NE. 20. No*. 

HE. Tcov yvcoaTiKcov ye, olfiai, TravTairacn re- 
\syymv. 



2. Tjji' apa — ^vv6r](rofiev\ Be- 
cause kingcraft depends en- 
tirely on knowledge (supra 

C, aKka firjv pap-qi/), and, 

in point of the knowledge 
required, these arts have been 
shewn to be the same, supi^a 
a, b. There is a slight inex- 
actness in iravra ravra being 
used for two things (n-oXi- 
tikt) and j3ao-tXtK)y). This is 
perhaps due to the same 
phrase having occurred above, 
where more than two arts 
were enumerated, p. 258 e. 

10. Siacpvrjv] " Any natural 
parting or cleft." The word 
is used literally in Phaedo 98 c 
for the ligaments between the 
bones of the human body : to. 

ocrra e'xei 8ia(pvas X W P' ? an ' o-Wtj- 

\av. Every conceivable image 
is employed to express the 
"lines and veins" of nature, 
which are the ground of true 



logical distinctions. Cf. Soph. 
229 b, ropfjv: ib. 268 e, 8t- 
ttXotjv. The present image cor- 
responds with the language of 
Phsedr. 265 e: repveiv — kut 

apdpa k. r. X. See also ibid. 

268 a : el Ka\ aol (paiverai 8ie- 
o~ttjk6s aiiTav to rjTpiov, axnrep 

epoi Most MSS. have 81a- 

Cpvyrjv. 

12. rju] The past tense 
implies no reference to any 
former passage, but is only 
the common form of allu- 
sion to a familiar fact. Xo- 
yio-TiKr) is instanced instead of 
dpidprjTiKT] for the sake of va- 
riety. The distinction here 
introduced by Plato is applied 
in Ar. Eth. VI. 10, § 2, where 
wisdom is distinguished from 
intelligence : fj pev yap (pp6- 
vrjais eTTiTaKTiKr] iariv, rj §e avv- 
iaiS KptTlKT) povov. 



riOAITIKOS. 



11 



259- NE. 20. Tim <$' ov; 

3?E. rVoucrx; 8e XoyiaTLKrj ttjv ev tols dpiOfioL? 
8ia(j)opou> fitJov tl irXeov epyov 8cocrofjL€i> r) to. yvu>- 
aOevra Kplvai ; 

NE. 20. 17 fir)V ; 

SE. Kat yap dpyiTeKT<£>v ye was ouk olvto? epya- 
tlko9, dXXd £pya.TU)V apyu>v. 

NE. 20. Nat. 

3?E. JJape-^ofievos ye wov yvwaiv, dXX ov %€i- 
povpyiav. 

NE. 20. Ovrm. 
2,6o. ££E. Aikolico? Srj fiereyeiv av XeyoiTO ttj? yvcDcm- 
kt]$ e7rio~Tr}firjs. 

NE. 20. Udvv ye. 

SE. Tovtco Se ye, oI/jlcu, irpoarjKeL Kpivavri /jltj 
reXos ^X av I* 7 ! *' aTrrjXXdyOai, KaOdirep 6 XoyicrTrj? 
diryjXXaKTO, irpoo-TaTTeiv Se eKaaroLS twv epyarow 
to ye irpoatyopov, ems av direpydo-^vTai to irpo- 
GTayOev. 



Arith- 
metic, for 
instanci . i ; 

purely cri- 
tical : the 
Master 
Builder, on 
the other 
hand, while 
his busi- 
ness is 
theory and 
not prac- 
tice, must 
superin- 
tend the 
1 application 
of his 
theory. 



2. Tpoicrt) Se 'KoyiariKfiJ " But 
when arithmetic has discerned 
the differences amongst num- 
bers, shall we give her any 
further office than to judge of 
that which she has discerned?" 
Ans. "How should we?" (ri 

6. Kal yap apxireKToiv ye ttRs 

k.t.A.] ri fx-fjv expresses surprise 
that the question should have 
been asked. An example which 
justifies the question is, there- 
fore, introduced with yap. 
" I asked because there are 
branches of theoretical know- 
ledge which do not end in 
theory." There may seem at 
first sight to be a confusion in 



classing the master-carpenter 
under yvaxmicrj, when carpen- 
try has been placed amongst 
the practical sciences. But 
this helps to shew that the 
" commanding sciences," al- 
though independent of prac- 
tice, yet have an immediate 
relation to the practical. 

1 8. to ye Trp6o-(popov\ He is 
not wholly engaged in directing 
his workmen, nor does he im- 
part all his knowledge to each 
of them, but he must direct 
each in so far as is required 
for the particular work ap- 
pointed them. This limitation 
is expressed by ye. 



C 2 



12 



FIAAT0N02 



This dis- 
tinction 
being ad- 
mitted, it 
is easy to 
see that 
the King 
is not a 
mere spec- 
tator of the 
life of the 
city, but 
that his 
science, 
while theo- 
retical, is 
also com- 
manding^ 



NE. 20. 'OpOm. p- 26 

HE. Qvkovv yvGXTTLKol ptv dl re toiolvtcu tjvp- 
TracraL kcu biroaai '^vveirovTai ttj Xoyio-TiKr}, Kplaet 
8e Kai imraijei Siafpeperov aXXijkoLv rovrco too b 
5 yevee ; 

NE. 20. <balv€cr6ov. 

HE. ' Ap ovv (TvpTraon]? tyjs yvooaTiKr}? el to p.ev 

eTTLTOLKTlKOV /JL€pO?, TO 8e KptTLKOV StaipOVpeVOL 7T/30- 

aei7rotpeu, eppeAu)? av (palpev diyprjadou ; 
10 NE. 20. Kara ye ttjv eprjv 86^av. 

HE. 'AAAa prjv tols ye kolvt} tl TrpaTTOvaiv aya- 
tttjtov bpovoelv. 

NE. 20. YimS ou; 

HE. Tovtov tq'lvvv p.expt7rep av avrol Kotvco- 
15 vcopev^ eareov to. ye tcov olWcdv So^acrpaTa 
Xalpeiu. 

NE. SO. Ti firjv ; 

HE. <&epe Srj, TOVTaiv toIv Teyyaiv rjpuv tov /3a- c 
o-ikiKov iv iroTepa QeTeov ; ap ev Tjj KpiTiKrj, KaOd- 



5. ye'vee] The open form 
is probably retained to distin- 
guish the dual from the plural 
yivrj. 

7. to fj,ev eniTaKTiKov pepos, 
to 8e KpiTucov] Ar. Pol. IV. 1 2 : 
Makio-Ta Se, ws cnrXcos elTveiv, 
dpxas XeKTeov ravras, oaois cmo- 
oVoorai ftovXevo-aadai re 7repl ti- 
va>v Kai Kplvai Ka\ eTTiTatjat.' Ka\ 
p.akio-Ta tovto, to yap emraTTfiv 
apxiKaTepov io~Tiv. lb. VII. 5 : 
apXOVTOs 6° eVtVn|i? Ka\ Kpio-is 
ecrrtV. 

1 1 . 'AAAa p.i)v — j^aipeiv] The 

maxim is appropriately bor- 
rowed from political science 
(for opovoia is noXiTiKr/ (piXia) 



in order to assert the indepen- 
dence of the dialectical reason. 
The same thing is meant as in 
Gorgias 472 b ; Protag. 331 c, 
348 a. 

19. Kadcmep Tiva BeaTrjv] Plato 
recurs to the image of the 
theatre, which he employed in 
Thepet. 173 C : oibe 6eaTi)s, &o~- 
Trep iroirjTals. 

The notion of iiriTOKTiKr] 
may be compared with Kant's 
imperative of the reason : an 
ideal which has immediate re- 
ference to life. In Socrates, 
philosophy becomes practical 
without losing anything of the 
speculative impulse. 



nOAITIKOS. 



13 



260. 7rep Tiva 6eari']v ; ?) pdXXov Trjs eTriTaKTiKrj? o>9 ovra 
avrov T€)(V7]? O/jcropev, SeaTro^ovrd ye ; 

NE. 20. riwy yap ov p.dXXov ; 

HE. T?}^ eirLTaKTiKi-jV 81) reyyi]v ttolXlv dv elrj 

Oeareov el ttt) bieo-rrjKe. Kai fioi SoKei rfjSe Try, Ka6d- 

irep rj tcov Kair-qXtov reyyr\ tyjs tcov avT07TtoXcov 8lco- 

d picrTai ri)(yrj9, koll to fiaaiXiKov yevos eoiKev diro 

tov tcov KijpvKcov yevovs a(pa>pio-0ai. 

NE, 20. nc5y ; 

SE. YlcoXrjde'vra ttov irporepov epya dXXorpta 
TrapaSe\6pevoL SevTepov ttcoXovctl ttoXlv o'l KairrjXoL- 

NE. 20. Yiavv pep ovv. 

AE. Ovkovv koll to KTjpvKLKov <j)v\ov eTTurayQevT 
aXXorpca vo-qpara irapafteyopevov avrb SevTepov eiri- 
TaTTei ttolXlv erepois. 

NE. 20. 'AXr)0eo-TaTa. 

SE. TV ovv ; els ravrov pi^opev (3ao-iXiKr)v eppr]- 
e vevTLKjj, KeXevoTTiKr}, ptavTiKrj, KrjpVKLKjj koll ttoXXoas 



10 But com- 
manding 
science is 
distin- 
guished 
into origi- 
nal and 
derived, 
much as 
the inanu- 

*5 facturer 
is distin- 
guished 
from the re- 
tail dealer. 
This sepa- 
rates the 



2. cW7ro£bi/ra ye] As the 

word ruler implies. Cf. Soph. 
221 d : cos navrbs del tolovtov 
eivai to y e ovopa tovto s^ccv. 

5. rfjde 7177] Sc. 8ietTTr]Kevai, 
The clause KaBcmep — ucpcopladai 

is in apposition with (or ex- 
plains) TySe irrj SieaTTjuevai, and 
the notion of 8oKel is resumed 

in eoiKev. 

6. avTOTTcoXcov] 9 MSS. have 

avTomoXcov. 

13. Ovkovv — ire pots'] The 
change from imTax&ev TaWorpia 
to eTnraxdevr dWorpia is SO 
slight and so necessary as 
hardly to deserve notice were 
not the former received by 
Bekker and defended by Stall- 



bauni. The plural e/rtrax&Wa 
and the absence of the article 
are both required by the paral- 
lelism to irccikrjdeura dWorpia 

in the previous sentence, avrol 
is not pleonastic but emphatic. 
" The heralds themselves give 
orders in their turn." 

17. irigopev] Boell. An. F. 
Bekk. Tut. pi^copev. The other 
MSS. and edd. have plgopev. 
The point can hardly be deter- 
mined, and the change either 
way is extremely slight. With 
Stallbaum, I am inclined to 
prefer plgopev, as more dis- 
tinctly pointing to a negative 
ansAver. 



14 



riAATONOS 



king from 
the herald, 
the inter- 
preter, the 
prophet, 
and others 
whose duty 
it may 
often be to 
issue com- 
mands. 



erepais rovTCdv T€)(i>cu? avyyeveaiv, at avfiTracrai to p. 26c 
y tiuTOLTTeiv eypvcriv ; 7) (3ovAei, KaOairep elKa^ppev 
vvv 8rj, kou Tovvopa irapeiKao-wpev, eireibi^ koll cr^eShv 
avcavvpov ov Tvyyavei to twv avTeirvraKToiv yevos, 

5 kou TavTYf Tama SteXcopeda, to p.ev tcov fiao-iXecov 
yevos els ti]v avTeirtTaKTLKrjv OevTes, tov 8e aXXov 
iravTos apeArjaavTes, ovojicl erepov avTols irapayo>- 
prjcravTes OecrOai two. ; tov yap apyovTos eveica rjpuv 
7} jjl€0o8o? rjv, aXX ov^l tov evavTiov. p. 26 

10 NE. 20. Yldvv ptev ovv. 

aE. Ovkovv erreidr] tovto p.eTpiw9 atyeaTrjKev our 
eKeivcov, aXkoTpLOTTjTi Stopio-Oeu irpbs oiKeiOTrjTa, 
tovto avTO iraXiv av SiaLpelu avayKalov, el Tiva 
TOpLrjV eri eyppev vireUovaav ev tovtco ; 

15 NE. 20. Uoipv ye. 



1. tovtcov re)(yais cvyyeveaiv\ 
The order is Texvais avyyeveaiv 

tovtcov. Many other instances 
of inversion might have heen 
noticed. 

to y' itiiTaTTeiv ] I. e. hy 
whatever further characteristic 
they may be distinguished. 

2. tcaBdrrep eiKa^opev — napei- 

Kao-afiev] " Shall we form the 
name analogically, in accordance 
Avith the comparison which we 
made just now" — viz. between 
the king and the avT07ra>\r]s 1 

7. iTepov — Tiva] Lit. " Step- 
ping aside for some other to 
give them a name." The ac- 
cusative before 6eo-6ai is pre- 
ferred to the dative after 

7rapax<i>pr]0-avTe<; to avoid the 

collision of two datives (eVepw 
avrols). There is a slight irony 
in Trapaxcoprjo-avTes, " yielding 
the merit to another." Cf. 
Soph. 267 b, Prot. 336 c. 



II. Ovkovv oIk(i6t^to\ Since 

then this kind has been dis- 
tinguished from the rest with 
tolerable clearness, being de- 
fined by contrasting what 
comes from others with that 
which originates with oneself. 

1 3. el] Either " to divide, 
if we can find a line of sec- 
tion : " or, perhaps better, " to 
divide, and see whether we can 
find a line of section." 

Tiva roprjv — exopev ] This 

phraseology reappears in Legg. 

II, 944 b: exei Tiva TOfiriv 77 
Tovrav tcov ovopdrav emcpopd. 

14. Top.r]v] Cf. supr. p. 259 
d, 8ia(pvrjv, and note. 

v7reUovo-av] " Yielding" to 
the sharp instrument of di- 
vision, the " dividing edge" 
of thought. Cf. Tim. 62 b: 

o-Kkrjpd SV, oaois oz> rjpS>v fj (rapt- 
vire'iKt), 



nOAITIKOS. 



15 



261. £?E. Kal fju)v i\>aivope6a €\€IV «AA' eiraKoXovOcov 
crvvrepve. 

NE. 20. Ufi ; 

SE. Hco/ray biroaovs av upypvTas 8Lavoi]0wp.ev 
eiriTa^ei Trpoor\pu>pevov9, dp ov\ evpr)aop.ev yevecrem 
b twos eveKa TrpoaraTTOvras ; 
NE. 20. Wmh' ov; 

SE. Kal prjv ra ye ytyvopeva iravra hlya Sia- 
Aa/3e«> ov iravrdirao-L yaXeirov. 

NE. 20. ufj ; 

£?E. Ta /^ey a\j/v)(a avrcoi/ earl ttov ^vpiravTcov, 
ra S' epy^vya. 

NE. SO. Nat. 

AE. TouVoiS 1 oV ye avTols to tov yvcocrTiKov pepos 
eiriraKTiKov ov, e'iirep fiov\6pe6a Tepveiv, repovp.ev. 

NE. 20. Kararl; 

SE. To p}v eVi tous* tcdv d^v^cov yeveo~ecriv av" 
c tov Tacro-ovTes, to <5' eVi Tats twv ep^v^wv. Kal irav 
ovtcos rfSrj diaiprjaeTaL 6Yx«« 

NE. 20. YlavTaTrao-L ye. 

3E. To p.ev To'ivvv avTcou TrapaX'nrwpev, to <5' 
avaAa(3copLei>, avaXafiovTes 8e p,epLO~cope0a els 8vo to 
avpirav. 



There Is a 

further dis- 
tinction. 



All com- 
mands is- 
5 8ue<l by a 
sovereign 

intend the 
doing or 
making of 
somotliiiiLf. 



Now the 
objects of 
all produc- 
tion, and 
therefore of 
works com- 
manded, 
are inani- 
5 mate, like 
those of 
the master 
builder, or 
animate, 
as are the 
subjects of 
the king. 



I. e7rciKo\ovda>v crvvrefive ] 

" Follow and divide with me." 
Cf. Soph. 228 c. 

5. yeveaeas tlvos evena] "For 

the sake of some production." 
The word yeveo-is in Plato's 
later dialogues acquires a wide 
generality of meaning. Com- 
pare the following passages : 
Soph. 235 e ; Polit. 282 d, 
283 d, 284 c j Phileb. 26 d, 
27 a; Tim. 29 d ; Legg. 10, 
889 a, 892 c, 11, 920 e. 



14. Tovtois — avrols] Sc. tw 
d\l/vxcj> re ku\ e/x^v^cp. Cf. SUpr. 
260a: Kpiaei — Kal intranet, ilifr. 
264 e : ra TVT-qva re Kai 7re£cp. 

17. To fiiv — avrov] " The one 
segment of it" (tov ttjs yva- 

CTTIKTJS fJLtpOVS (TTlTaKTlKOV). 

18, Tah t5>v i/jL^uxoov] be. ye- 

vio-eo-L. " The pi-ocesses which 
affect living creatures." 

22. to o-vp.Trav] Epexegetic 
in apposition with to 6V. 



16 



riAATONOS 



But the 
production 
and nur- 
ture of ani- 
mals may- 
be cared 
for either 
singly or 
in herds. 
The States- 
man is not 
a groom, 
hut a herds- 
man. And 
whether we 
give to this 
latter 
branch of 
animal- 
tending 
the name 
of herding, 
or of feed- 
ing in 
flocks, it 
matters 
little. 
Word- 
catching 
is not the 
way to get 
rich in 
thoughts. 



NE. 20. \eyeis 5' avroiv dvaXt-pvTeov elvai iro- 
Ttpov ; 

SE. UdvTcos' 7rov to 7repl to. £o3a limaKTiKov. 
ov yap 8r) to ye tyjs fiaaLXiKr)s e7ncrTr)p.r)s Icttl ttotz 

5 Ttt)V d\j/U)(COV llTLCTTaTOVV^ 0L0V dp)(LTeKTOVLKOV, dXXa 

yevvaioTepov, ev toIs ^coois" kou Trepl amd Tama ttjv 
Svvapiv del KeKTr/pevov. 

NE. 20. 'Op0m. 

3?E. Ttjv ye p.r)v tcov tjcooov yeveoriv K.a\ Tpo(f)r)v 
iott)i> p.ev tls av t8ot p,ovoTpo<plav ovcrav, ttjv he kolvtjv 
tcov ev toLs dyeXais OpeptpLaToov eiripieXeLav. 

NE. 20. 'Op0m. 

SE. 'AAA' ov p.r)v tov ye ttoXltlkov evpr)aop.ev 
idioTp6<pov, cocnrep (3orjXaTr)v rj Tiva 'nnroK.6p.ov, aAA' 
is linrotyopficp re /ecu (3ov(f)op/3cp ptaXXov irpocreoiKOTa. 

NE. 20. QaiveTal ye 8r) pr)8ev vvv. 

HE. WoTepOV OVV TYjS {(0OTpO(f)LaS TTJV TCOV £vp.- 

ttoXXcov kolvtjv Tpofyrjv dyeXatoTpofpiav r) KOivoTpofpi- 
K-qv Tiva 6vop.dtfiL>pev ; 
20 NE. 20. 'OiroTepov av ev tco Xoyco avp.^aivrj. 
SE. KaAaiy ye, co 2w/cpa7-es" kolv 8ia(f)vXdtjr)s to 
p.rj airovhd^eLv erri toIs ovoptaaL, irXovcrLcoTepos eis to 



p. 2f 



g. yeveaiv Ka\ Tpocprjv] The 

ambiguity of the word yeveais 
helps to conceal the error of 
confusing the king with the 
shepherd, which affords so 
much matter for discussion in 
what follows. 

14. ^orjkarrjv] One who drives 
an ox : as, for instance, in 
ploughing. 

1 6. Qaiverai — prjdev vvv] Cf. 
Soph. 226 d : S^eSoi/ ovTOi vvv 
AeX<9ee (paiverai, Rep. 7, 525 d, 

iwoa p7]6evros k.t.A., and com- 



pare the Homeric pe^dev Be re 
VTjTTLOi e'yvio. 

2 1. to p.fj aivovha^eiv in\ rols 
ovofiaai ] Plato frequently 
dwells on the danger of being 
imposed on in philosophy by 
words ; and alludes to the viti- 
ating effect which a love of ver- 
bal distinction had on his con- 
temporaries. Cf. e. g. Thetet. 
166 b, 177 e, 184 c ; Soph. 
218 c ; Rep. 5, 454 a. 

2 2. 7r\ovaia>Tepos (Is to yrjpas] 

Unlike the 6^np.a6a.s of Soph. 



nOAITIKOS. 



17 



261. yrjpas dva([)aviio~ei ijypovrjaeco^. vvv 8e tovto pev, 
Ka.6a.7rcp 8iai<eA.evei, iroirjTeov ti]v 8e dyeAaioTpo(j)i- 
Ki]v ap y evvoels Trfj tl? 8l8vpov 6t7ro0?/f«y to ^r/Tovpe- 

262. vov ev dLTrXacrLOLcri ra vvv ev tols rjpureaiv ety Tore 
7Ton]aeL (jyrtiaOai ; 

NE. 20. UpoOvpr/cropai. Kal /jlol 8oKel tcov p.ev 
dvOpooiroov erepa ti? eivai, tcov 8e av Oijplcov dAArj 
rpo(f)i]. 

■HE. YlavTairacri ye irpoOvpoTara kol avSpeioTara 
Strjpi-jo-aL. pi] pevToi tovto ye elaavOis koto, dvvapiv 
7Tcio~)(copev. 

NE. m To wohv; 

SE. M?) apiKpbv popiov ev 77750? peyaXa koI 

h TToXAa d^aipcopev, pi]8e e'lSovs \copk' aAAa to p.e- 

pos dp,a el8o? eyeTco. kolWiottov p.ev yap dirb tcov 

d/XAcov evOvs Sia^copl^eiv to Q]Tovpevov, av opOco? 



Bhall 

ili\ id 
herd 1 
art? Shall 
we 
once that 

III.!' 

5 kind that 
deals with 

men, and 

another 

with 

brutes ? 
This is to 
assume- boo 
much. For 
what is the 

10 ground of 
our distinc- 
tion be- 
tween men 
and brutes? 
We must 
proceed 
more gra- 
dually : 

j - dividing 
each kind 
as nearly 



251 b, who are perhaps thought 
of here. Cf. Phsedr. sub. fin. : 

TrXovaiov 8e vopi£oip.i tov <ro(p6v. 

2. ayeAa£orpo(/HK?}i>] He again 
varies the word in accordance 
with the preceding remark. 
" Do you perceive a way in 
which, by shewing the art of 
herding to be twofold, one 
may cause what is now sought 
amongst twice the number of 
things to be then sought 
amongst half that number?" 
rcls rip. the half, i. e. of the 
double number. 

4. Si7rAao-toi(n] So H. Most 
MSS. have Sm'kao-iot.s ?/'(Bodl.i7). 

The Ionic form of the dative 
plural (which occurs again infr. 
304 e) is one of the many co- 
incidences in point of language 
between this dialogue and the 
Laws. 



14. to pepos ajia eiSos e'^fVco] 

The spirit of this passage may 
be compared with Phsedr. 265 

e: kclt e'i8r] repveiv, — Ka\ pr] eVi- 
Xeipelv Karayvvvai jxepos p.rj8ev : 

Phileb. 14 e : tu peXij re km 

ap.a p-epr) die\a>v rw Ao'yw. Pep. 
4, 445 d : oo-oi — iroKiTeimv rpo- 
7rot €lo~\v e'i8rj e'xovres. The true 

dialectician is he who hits 
upon the real divisions of 
things : and the real divisions 
are those which a true dialec- 
tician would make. It is diffi- 
cult to say in how far the 
" form" here spoken of is ob- 
jective, and how far subjective. 
As we should say, "do not 
divide without a principle of 
division." 

16. av 6p8a)s e'xn] "If your 
division proves to be the right 
one." Young Socrates is allowed 



IS 



nAATQNOS 



as we ''.-in 
in half, and 
making 
sure that 
we can 
assign a 
rational 
principle 
for each 
distinction. 



Thus 
our coun- 
t^nien 
make a 
great as- 
sumption 
when they 



t)(r), KaOairep oXiyov av npOTepov ob]0et? ^X eiv T ^ v P* 2< ^ 2 
Siaipeaiv iTricnrtvaas tov Xoyov, iocov eV dv0pa>7rovs 
wopevoptevov. dXXa yap, co (fiiXe, XeirTovpyelv ovk 
aarcjiaXes, did pieacov oe dcr(f)aXeaT€pov levai Tepivov- 
5Tcts, kou pdXXov iSe'ai? av ti? irpo(JTvy\dvoi. tovto 
oe Sia(f)e'peL to irdv irpos ras (r)Tr/<T€i?. c 

NE. 212. n<M?, (6 £eW, Xeyeis tovto ; 

HE. YleipaTeov en aa(peaTepov (Ppd^eiv evvola 

tyjs ar}9 (pvaeoos, co Sw/c/oarey. ev tco pev ovv irape- 

locrTrjKOTi to. vvv Sr]Xcoaai p.r)8ev evdem dhvvaTOV 

e7ri\eipr)Teov oe tl kgu apuKpcp 7rXeov avTO irpoayayelv 

eh to irpocrOev cracprjveia? eveKa. 

NE. 20. Iloiov ovv 8rj (ppd^ei? 8iaipovp.evov? 
rjp.5.9 ovk 6p$a>? dpTi Spav ; 



to fall into a natural error, 
for the sake of illustrating the 
difference between the right 
and the wrong method. 

1. Kaddnep — e\eiv\ Sc. opQcos. 

2. eneaneva-as — Tropevopc-vov] 

" You hastened the steps of the 
inquiry when you saw them 
directed towards mankind." 
"The Argument" is still per- 
sonified. 

iireo~ntvo~as tov \6yov] Cf. 



Leo-a. 2, 6*8 a: 



fir) Taxy to 



toiovtov Kpivapeda, dWa Biai- 
povvTes kcito. peprj aKoncopeda, 

3. Xe7rrovpyeTi/] " To make 
short work." "To cut off too 
small a piece." 

5. tovto 8e 8ia(pepei to 7raid, 

Here, as in the latter part of 
the Phfedrus, the Idea is the 
true form, not separated from 
the matter, but discerned by 
dialectic amongst particulars : 
the objective element in each 
determination of thought. 

8, etvvia Trjs o~rjs (pvaecos, w 



2a> K pa.Tes] Cf. The^t. 1 85 ; 

Soph. 266 ; Parm. 130 : where 
the capacity of the hearer is 
likewise made the measure of 
the enunciation of some great 
truth. In Rep. 7, 529 e, on 
the contrary, "dear Glaucon" 
is not thought capable of fol- 
lowing the most abstract ac- 
count of dialectic. In the 
present passage also Plato 
breaks off abruptly : " It is 
impossible to explain it per- 
fectly at this present juncture." 

ev tco 7rapeo-TrjKOTi to. vvv. Per- 
haps all such discussions were 
reserved for the "Philosophus ;" 
and this may be one reason 
why that dialogue was never 
written. 

1 1 . Trpoayaye'iv] Cf. Al\ Pol. 
III. 7 : KaXas 8' e%ei Kai vvv 
avaXaftovTas avTa npoayayelv. 

13. Holov] Governed by ovk 
opBca — Spav, " What mistake 
do you say we have just made 
in our divisions V 



nOAITIKOS. 



19 



1 2^2. HE. ToiOvSt, 0101/ €£ 779 TUl/Opomtl/01/ €7TL)(€lpl')aa9 

d 5/)(a SieXeaOcu yei/os 8icupoi KaOdirep ol -iroXXol tcoi/ 
ii/0a8e Siavt/jLOvcrt, to p.ei/ 'EXXiji/lkoi/ cos* €1/ diro 
iravTcoi/ adxiipovvres X 60 /^' 9 ? o-vp.iraaL 8e toIs uXXols 
ye'i/ecrii/, direipOLS overt, kcu (x/jliktoi? kcu davfJL(f)coi/0L9 
npo? dXXrjXa, (Sdpfiapov p.ia kXh]ct€i irpocreLTrovTes 
avro, 8td ravrrji/ rr\v jxiav kXtjctii/ kcu ytvos ev avro 
elvcu 7rpoa8oKa>aii/' rj rov dpiOpov ris av vopLi^oi 
kclt eldi] Svo Diaipeiv pvpiada dirorepvopevos anro 

e TTOLVTCDV, MS €l> el8o? d.7TO)(C0pi(p)l/ f KCU TCp XoiTTCp 8r) 

ttgu/tl Oepevos ev ovopa, 8ia rrjv kXtjctlv av kcu tovt 
dijioi yevos eKelvov x^P^ erepov ev ylyvecrOai. KaX- 
Xlov Se irov kcu fiaXXov kclt etdrj kcil 8lxa Siaipolr 
av, el tov fiei/ dpiOfiov dpruo kcu TrepiTTCp ti? re/ivoi, 



divide 
mankind 
into ' 

and Barba- 
rian, and 
bo would 
any one 
who divi- 
5 ded nuni- 
!■■ ra into 
ten thou- 
sand mtkI 

all i> 

ten thou- 
sand. It 
would be 
more scien- 
tific to dis- 
IO tiugniflh 
number 
into odd 
and even, 
and man- 
kind into 
male and 
female, and 
not to in- 



3. ivddbe~\ Sc. Kara rrjv 'EX- 
XaSa. 

ro pev — TrpoadoKwaij These 
words are explanatory of Siave- 
ixoviri. Hence, as elsewhere 
explained, the absence of a 
connecting particle, or relative. 
Or perhaps it is better to sup- 
pose a return from the par- 
ticiple to the indicative in 
TvpoadoKaxri. 

5. yeveaiv — Trpoaenrovres avro] 
There is a change of construc- 
tion : that at first intended 

being (3dp(3apov ev ovopa depevoi, 

or something of the kind. 
avro, which resumes o-vp.Tr. t. a. 
yev., is suggested by the accu- 
sative (Bdpfiapov. The grammar 
may, of course, be saved by 
omitting avro. But this is 
unnecessary : 7mXcu yap iapev 

dvdiikea> tcov tolovtcciv. 

dp'iKTots kci\ d<Tvp.(fid>vois~\ "Nei- 
ther holding any intercourse (or 
intermarrying, vid. inf. 265 e) 



nor understanding one an- 
other's speech." 

8. vopl£oi] " Should use," 
" be wont," " adopt the custom 
of." Cf. Legg. 10, 908 e: to 

6eois vopi^ov dpeXelv eL8os. 

9. divoTepvopevos ] For the 
middle voice, cf. Soph. 287 a, 
Phsedr. 266 a. 

13. pa\\ov — Si'xa] Compare 
the stress which is laid on 
the bisection, if possible, of 
each kind, in Phileb. 16 d : 

perd piav ovo, e'i ttcos eltri, ovco- 

■nelv. Cf. supr. 262 a : 1-6 £7- 

rovpevov ev o"i7rXao-i'oicrt ravvv ev 
Tois ripicrecriv els Tore Troirjcrei 

fyrelcrdai : an injunction which 
suggested the rule which the 
answer has violated. There 
is here the same love of pro- 
portion and equality which 
appears in Aristotle's account 
of Justice. See especially his 
etymology of oWonfo quasi 

Ol^a(TTt]S. 



D 2 



20 



IIAATONOS 



troduce 
such acci- 
dental dif- 

f.T.'lii-i'S as 

Lydian or 
J 'In" gian 
(not to say 
Greek), 
until he 
were at a 
loss for a 
distinction 
which had 
a rational 
ground. 
But, it may 
be asked, 
how can we 
tell when a 
division is 
accidental 
and when 
real? This 
question is 
reserved : 
and we re- 
turn to the 
distinction 
of young- 
Socrates, 
between 
man and 
the brutes. 
Which is 
just as if 
that ra- 
tional and 
politic ani- 
mal the 



to 8e av tcov dvOpcoTrow yevos dppevi koll GrjXei, p. 
AvSov s 8e i] fypvyas rj TLvas eTepov? irpo? diravTa? 

TCLTTitiV U7rO(T)(L(j)L T0T6, TjVLKa OflTOpOL yeVO? CipLOL KOLL 

fxepo? evp[<JK€LV eKaTepov tcov o-yLcrQevTcov. p. 

5 NE. 20. 'OpOoraTa. dXXa yap tovto clvto, co 
Ije've, ttco? av tl? yevo? Ka\ fxepo? evapyeuTepov yvoLrj, 
to? ov ravrov earou aAA' eTepov dXXrjXoiv ; 

37E. 'O jSe'Aricrre dvdpcov, ov (pavXov TrpocrTaTTeL?, 
^EcoKpaTe?. r)iiel? /xeV klxl vvv jiaKpoTepav TOV OCOVTO? 
ioa7ro tov irpoTeOevTO? Xoyov TreirXaviyieOa, av cf en 
irXe'ov r)fia? KeXeveL? TfXavijdrjvaL. vvv fiev ovv, cocnrep 
ej/co?, erravLcopLev ttolXlv' ravra oe elcravQi? Kara cryp- 
Xrjv, KaOairep lyvevovTe?, p.eTLp.ev. ov firjv dXXa tovto h 
ye av iravTairaaL 0u'Aa£ou ? firj iroTe Trap epiov Sotjy? 
15 avTO evapyco? 8Lcopio~fievov dfcrjicoevai. 
NE. 20. To Trohv ; 

HE. Ei'oo? re koI fiepo? eTepov dXXrjXcov eivai. 
NE. 20. TV tirjv ; 

SE. 'Off eldo? fiev OTav r) tov, Ka\ fiepo? amo 
10 avayKolov eivai tov TrpdyjxaTO? OTOvirep av el8o? 



16 



2. Avhovs 8e rj <&pvyas f)' Ttvas 

erepovs] There is deep irony 
in the substitution of these 
despised names (Eur. Ale. 675: 
3> ttcu, tip' alxeis, iroTepa Av8dv 
i) fypvya kokoIs eXavveiv apyvpa>- 
vtjtov ueOev) for that of "EXhrjves 

as opposed to Bapfiapoi : and 
the same view is continued 
presently, where, to shew the 
nature of the distinction be- 
tween men and beasts, cranes 
are put in the place of men, 
whom they are supposed in 
turn to include amongst the 
beasts. 



5. tovto ai)To\ Sc. Xeye or 

4>pa£e implied in the question. 

13. KaBanep l%vevovTes] Cf. 

Theaet. 187 e : ovk. airb Kaipov 

TTtikiv (oo-rrep 'l^vos peTe\6elv. 

14. pr) ivore 86^rjs auro] avTO 

is again used with a more dis- 
tinct reference to what follows 
than to what precedes. 

17. eTepov] By attraction 

for eTepa. 

19. 'Sis ei8os pev — awryfer;] Cf. 

Prot. 350 c, where the non- 
convertibility of a universal 
affirmative is similarly noticed 
as a new thought. See also 



nOAITIKOS. 



21 



263. XlyryraC pepos 8e dSo? ov8epla avayicr). ravrrj p.e 
7] Keivr) fiaWov, a> ^LcoKpaTC?, da. (jjaOt Xcyeiv. 

NE. 20. Tavr earat. 
u SE. <\>pacrov Sij fj.01 to /xer« tovto. 

NE. 20. Uohv ; < 

SE. To tt)s airoTrXavr]ae(i)9 biroOtv rjpas Sevp 
rjyayeu. oificu pilv yap ptdXicrTa, oOev epcor^deh o~v 
ttjv dyeXaioTpofplav oivq StaLpereou aVe? paXa irpo- 
Ovficos oV tlvai ^cocou yevi], to pev dvOpomtvov, ere- 
pov Se T(ov aXXodv ^vpnrdvTtov Grjpicov ev. 

NE. 20. 'AX-qOTj. 

fiE. Kcu kpoiye Sr) tot e([)av7]s pepos d(f)atpcoi> 
rjyeixrOcu KaTaXtireiv to Xolttov av iravTcov yivos ev, 
otl TTOLcri tclvtov lirovopd^uv sayes ovopa, Orjpia 
KaXeaas. ] 

d NE. 20. 'H^ KOU TaVTCt 0VTC0S. 

SE. To 8e ye, co irdvTu>v dvSpeioTaTe, Tay av, 



crane wr< re 
to put 
cram in 

gory, and 

the "ili' i- 
animals, 
including 
men, in 
another, 
with, it 
may I"-, bhe 
Bame name 
of ' bruti -.' 
Such crude 
logic must 
be avoided 
here. 



ib. 329c! : Tvorepov — axnrep irpoa- 
a>7rcv ra p.6pia — aropa re kci\ 
pis k.t.A. fj &<rnep ra tov ypucroi) 
p.6pia K.r.X. 

I. pe'pos 8e (l8os ov$ep.ia av- 

ayKT)] At whatever point divi- 
sion is made, that which is cut 
off is equally a part. But each 
euW, besides being part of a 
whole, has a natural unity and 
a character distinct from that 
of every other part. 

6. oiroOev ljyayev\ Cf. Rep. 

8, 543 6 : Ti66iV bevpo e^erpa- 

7. udev] By attraction for 

eKeWev ov. 

8. paka npodvpas] Supra 
262 a: npoOvpoTura digpTjaai. 

12. tot] Bodl. AIT. tovt : 
which would seem plausible 
but for the absence of the 



article, pe'pos is used empha- 
tically as opp. to yevos : a part, 
but not necessarily a kind. 

13. Ka.TciXnre'ii' to \oitt6v aii 
ivavTav yevos eV ] " That you 

had left in what remained, one 
class including all." 

14. iirovopa^iv KtiAecray] 

Note the redundancy. 

17. To fie -ye] " Whereas in 
truth." Cf. (amongst many 
instances) Legg. 1, 630 d : to 

be TTms XP'1 V W<is \eyeiv ; 

ib iravTUtv ai'Spetorare] So 

also Legg. 10, 905 c. 

This passage has a real, 
though remote, bearing on 
two questions which have been 
associated also in recent in- 
quiry — the reality of species, 
and the relation of man to 
the lower animals. Plato, 



22 



nAATONOS 



ei 7rov (fjpovi/jLou earl n twov erepou, oiov Sokcl to p. 263. 
t(dv yepavwv, r) tl tolovtov aAAo, # Kara ravra Icrcos 



while believing firmly in the 
existence of lines of demarca- 
tion in Nature corresponding 
to the distinctions of science 
(not to those of common lan- 
guage and opinion), appears, 
so far as he has a serious 
meaning under the mask of 
irony, to recognize the possi- 
bility of a closer relationship 
between the human species 
and other animal forms than 
is readily acknowledged by 
man. The object of the whole 
passage, however, from p. 262 
a, is, probably, to correct a 
misapprehension to which the 
reasoning of the Sophist might 
give rise. The antithesis of 
Being and Not-Being is in the 
abstract exhaustive, and the 
purely abstract notion of to p.r) 
ov is perfectly definite. But 
in pai'ticular inquiries, such as 
the present, it is not enough 
to distinguish logically, a pri- 
ori, between "this" and "all 
that is not this." My con- 
ception of "this" gains no- 
thing from being opposed to 
a wholly indefinite idea in 
which there is no unity, and 
which is therefore not an 
idea. If the process of divi- 
sion is to acid anything to 
knowledge, the conceptions 
which exclude each other 
must both be clearly seen, and 
so must the boundary which 
divides them. In other words, 
there must be a reasonable 
and clearly understood ground 
or principle for each dicho- 
tomy. The positive as well 
as the negative element of the 
conception which is rejected 



must be recognized, in order 
that the negative as well as 
the positive content of the 
selected notion may be appre- 
hended. For instance, the 
comparative study of Natural 
History, Anatomy, and Physi- 
ology gives a far more com- 
plete notion of man's physical 
nature than is arrived at 
through the observation of man 
himself, or through the mere 
distinction at first hand be- 
tween man and the brutes. 

1. (ppovip.ov — to tcov yepdvcov\ 

The migratory habits of the 
crane gave him an important 
place in ancient fable. (H"m. 
II. r. 3-7.) Aristotle suggests 
the following reasons for sup- 
posing the existence of reason 
in the crane. De Anim. H. ix. 
1 1 : <&p6vifia Se 7roXAa ku\ irepX 
to>v yepdveov So/cet o~vp.(3alvetv. 

€KTOTTL^OVO-l yap fiaKpCLV, KO.I tig 

v\}sos tt£tovtm npos to Kadopav to. 
noppco' kcu iav 'idcoai ve(prj Kai 
Xmiepia, KciTaTVTacrai f]0-vxd£ov- 
criv. *Eti 8e ro ex elv f]yep-6va re 
kcu tovs eniavpiTTovTas iv rots 
ea^aTOLs, waTe KaraKOvecrdai ttjv 
(pa>vr]i>. "Orav 8e Kade£a>VT<u, at 
fxev SXkai vtto tt} TTTepvyi ttjv 
KeCpaXrjv i\ovo-ai Ka6ev8ovcrLv eVi 
ivos 7ro86s eva\\a§, 6 8e r]yep.tov 
yvp.urjv <?xav ttjv K€(pa\rjV irpoopq, 
ku\ OTav aicrflrjTai tl ar]p.aipei 
(3o5>v. 

to tcov yepavcov] Sc. yivos, 
infr. Or simply = oi yipavoi. 
Cf. SUpr. : to Tjji airoTvKavrjCTecos. 

2. * KCITO. TCLVTa] MSS. 6 KdTU 

TavTa. 6, which the Zurich 
editors reject and Bekker and 
Hermann include in brackets, 
is indefensible because inter- 



OOAITIKOI. 



28 



263. Siovopdlpi, KaOdirep koll <tv, yepdvovs plv ev yevos 
avTLTiOev rots aWois {wois koll Gdpvvvov avro eavro, 
rd <5e aWa perd tcdv dvOpdmc£>v tjvA\<tfioi> eh ravro 
ovSeu aXXo nXyu laws Orjpia irpoduiroL. TrtipaOcopev 
ovv -qpeis etjevXafleicrOai irdvb v OTroaa roiavra. 5 

c NE. 20. Urn ; 

HE. M?) irdv to tgov (jooov ylvos Siacpovpevoi, Iva 
i-jttov avrd irdayaipev. 

NE. 20. OvSev yap Set. 

SE. Kal yap ovv koll Tore -qpaprdvero ravrrf. 10 

NE. 20. T/&J; 

SE. Tfjs yvcoaTiKr}? ocrov tiriraKTiKOv rjplv pepos, 
yv ttov tov £coorpo(j)LKOV yevovs, ayeXaiwv prjv (jucov. 

v yap; 



rupting the sense between av 
and 8iovopd£oi, where the opt. is 
required by rrpoaeiiroi infr. 810- 
vofia£oi = distinguish in words. 
Note the return to the more 
direct constr. in irpocre'nroi. 

2. crepvvvov iavro ] Cf. 

Phileb. 28 d: ol aocpoi, eavrovs 
euros crepvyvovres. 

4. Trpoa-einoi] There is a re- 
turn from the participial to the 
more direct construction. 

5. igevkafteiaOai — TOtavra ] 
" Keep ourselves quite free 
from any such error." 

Where the use of compounds 
is so frequent, it is unsafe to 
lay too much stress on the 
meaning of prefixes. Hence 
in Soph. 231 c (where see note) 
perhaps egava-rrvevaapev means 

simply " to recover breath," as 
in Phsedr. 254 c. 

7. Mi) Trav to tu>v (a>a>v 8iaip.] 
" By not making the whole 
animal kingdom the object of 



our (final) division." I. e. By 
first subdividing it so as to 
deal with a part only. 

8. avrd] Cf. Theast. 207 d : 

8pu>vTas avrd. 

9. OvBev yap Sei] Either " In- 
deed we must not :" or, if ovdev 
refers to tjttov, " We must avoid 
it altogether — be (not less liable 
but) not at all liable to this 
mistake." The former is more 
idiomatic. 

1 o. Kal roVe] Also in a former 
division : viz. 261 d, where 
we distinguished 17 tS>v dyekaiav 
£ghov iiriTaKTLKr]. All animals, 
whether gregarious or other- 
wise, should have been first dis- 
inguished into wild and tame. 

12. oo-oi/ — pe'pos] Sub. rjv 

from nest clause. 

13. ayeKaianf u.rjv ^cocof] Cf. 
Legg. 3, 694 e (Cyrus is spoken 

of) : 6 fie' ye narrjp avTols av 
iroLpvia pev Kal irpofiara Kal ayeXas 
dvSpCop re Kal dXXtov noWa/v noX- 



We had 

already 
erred in the 
same direc- 
tion when 
we spoke of 
our " com- 
manding 
science" as 
concerned 
with herd- 
ed animals. 



9A 



IIAATQNOS 



For there 
is a pre- 
vious divi- 
: i.iii of ani- 
mals into 
viM and 
tame, and 
this wo 
passed 
over. Let 
ns be more 
guarded, 
now that 
we have 
felt the 
truth of the 
proverb, 
" More 
haste, 
worse 



We may 
thus arrive 
at the same 
result, but 
it will be 
worked out 
for us in a 
more satis- 
factory 
way. 



NE. 20. NaL p. 2M 

SE. Air/p)]To tolvvv ydr] /cat tote £yp.7rav to 
(fi>oi> rep TL0aacp /cat aypicp. ra p}v yap tyovro. p. 264 
TiOaaeveadaL (jjvaiv rjp.epa 7rpoo-elpi]Tai, ra Se fxi] 
5 e^ovra aypia. 

NE. 20. KaAa*. 

HE. ' Hu 8e ye 61-jpevopev einaTr]fnt)v, Iv Toh 
i)}i£poL9 r\v re Kal kartv, eVrt rois ayeAat'ot? p.tv 
fyrrjTea OpepLjiacriv. 
10 NE. 20. Nat. 

HE. Niij tolvvv Siacpcofieda wairep Tore, irpos 
airavra ajrofiXetyavTes, p.r)be crTrtvaavTes, u>a 8rj 
Tayv yevcofxeOa irpos rfj TroAtrt/cj}. ireiroirjKe yap b 
y/uias /cat vvv iraOtiv to KaTa Tt]v irapoi\xlav iraOos. 
15 NE. 20. Uohv ; 

HE. Oi))( rjcrvypvs ev BiaipovvTas rjuvKevac fipabv- 
Tepov. 

NE. 20. Kat /caAcos* ye, d> £eW, ireTrou-jKev . 

HE. TavT eaTco. itolXlv <5' ovv i£ ocpxi^ 

™rr)i> koivot potyatrjv 7T6ipcof.ieOa dtaipelv' tcra)? yap 

Kal tovto, o o~v 7rpodvjj.€?, dcaTrepaLvofievos 1 o 



Xa? eKTaro. lb. 5 j 735 • 7T <* a ' av 
dyeXrju noipip kcu /3oukoXo? rpo- 
(psvs re ovk aAXcos /z?;7rore eVtxei- 
pi]<Tj) Qeptmtveiv. 

3. e^ovra — <pv<riv\ l Whose 
nature admitted of domestica- 
tion." 

8. ?»] Cf. 263 e. 

fxev introduces a qualifica- 
tion, which would be expressed 
in English by an emphasis on 
the adjective. 

12. tva 8tj] Cf. Theset. 183a: 

iva 8rj 6p6rj (pavfj, 

1 6. Ov% r/avxovs — [SpabvTepov] 



The proverb ( = " More haste, 
worse speed") seems to be given 
verbatim, except that biaipovv- 
Tas is substituted for some more 
general word. 

eS] "Carefully." 

18. Kat KaKas ye] I. e. " We 

have reason to be glad of the 
delay." 

2 I . tovto civto o (TV npodvpel] 

I. e. the definition of man, as 
the object of the statesman's 
art. Supr. 262 b : tSa>i> in av- 
Bp&movs 7ropevop.evov. 

dianepaiv6p,evos — pr/viiaa] Cf. 



nOAITIKOS. 



25 



2^>4- Xoyos avTO? aoi KaXXiov fxrjvvau. kcjll pot 
(j)pd£e. 

NE. 20. Uohv Si] ; 

HE. ToSe, el TLV(£>v 7ro\\aKi? apa SlOLKrjKOa 1 }' 01) 

c yap 8i) 7rpoo-TV)(rjs ye olvto? olS" on ye'yovas rats ev 

ra> NelXco TiOao-elai? tu>v lydvcov /cat tcou ev rah 

fiacriXiKcus Xlpvai?. ev p.ev yap K.pr\vais rax av 

'term elrjg rjcrOrjpevos. 

NE. 20. Haw pev ovv Ka\ ravra redeap.at kul- 
Ktiva iroXXwv aKrjKoa. 

HE. Kat prjv \7)Vofi(x>Tias ye Kal yepavoficorla?, 



< . , garious 
tame ani- 

i mals in- 
clude 
shoals of 
fish and 
flocks of 
geese and 
cranes: as 
witness the 
fishponds 
of Egypt 

IO and Baby- 
lon and the 
plains of 
Thessaly. 



Le gg- 7> 199 e: K&v V M£' 

o8os avTT) 6X77 cr^ouera re'Aos iko.- 
va>s av pr/vvo-eie Kal to vvv 8uitto- 
povpevov. Al'ist. Pol. III. 3 : ovt6 
yap (pavev to \ex@ev irotel bifkov. 

I. avTOS prjvvcrei] Cf. Thefet. 

2 00 e : Tax' Q.V avTO (fiyjveie to 
^Tovpevov. Phileb. 20 : irpo'ibv 8' 
€Ti aa(pe'arepov 8ei£ei. 

4. TdoV, el Tivav\ " This, 

whether you have perhaps 
heard of it." Cf. Thetet. 158c: 

to ttoIov ' 6 noXkaKis ere olpat 
8iaKt]Koivai ipcoTcovTcov k.t.X. It 

does not seem certain whether 
noXkaKis is here " perhaps" (cf. 
Laches 194 a, Protag. 361 c, 
Polit. infr. 283 b) or "often :" 
cf. noWmv infr. c. But the for- 
mer is more probable. 

5. Trpoo-Tvxr]i] This word oc- 
curs again in the Laws and 
Epinomis, and nowhere else 
in Plato, or indeed in Greek. 

6. Tidacreiais] This word, an 
abstract noun formed from 
Tidao-evco, occurs nowhere else 
in classical Greek. The plural 
of the abstract noun is used to 
express the concrete. 



tcov iv Tals (3. Xifivaii] Sc. 
Ixdvcov. As if the former phrase 
had been Tals tcov iv t<o N. 
Ix8v<>>v Tidao-elais. " I know VOU 

have never had an opportunity 
of seeing how tame fish are 
kept in the Nile and in the 
ponds of the Great King." 

II. yepavoficoTias] The flocks 

of cranes are probably sug- 
gested by the previous mention 
of the crane. The crane is 
classed with man by Aristotle 

as not only dyeXaiov but ito\iti- 
kov &ov, the form of his con- 
stitution being a monarchy. 
De Anim. Hist. I. 1. § 11 : iro- 

\lTlKCL 8' ea-rlv cuv ev Tl Kal K01V0V 
yiyverai ndvTcov to epyov, onep ov 
TrdvTa Tvoiei to. dyikala. "Eari 8e 
tolovtov avdpconos, peXiTTa, (r<frr)£, 
pvpprj^, yepavos. Kal tovtwv to. 
pev vcp' ijyepova iaTi, to. o° avapxa, 
oiov yepavos pev Kal to tcov pe\iT- 
tcov yevos v(f> rjyepova, pvppr]Kes 
8e Kal pvpla r/XXa avapxa. Com- 
pare Plat. Phsfido 82 b: 7roXt- 
tikov re Kal ijpepov -yei/or, fj irov 
peXiTTcov, j) aqbrjKcov 7] pvpprjKcov — 
t] to dvdpairwov. 



( 26 



HAAT0N02 



Hence the 
art of herd- 
ing may be 

divided 
into sub- 
aqueous and 
terrene. 
And of the 
terrene 
creatures, 
one kind 
are fledged. 
Statecraft 
is occupied 
with the 
walking 
terrene 
animals : 
and for 
dividing 
these, rea- 
son points 
out a longer 
and a short- 
er way. 
The former 
is more in 
accordance j 
with the 
principles 
above laid 
down, 
but, as we 
have lei- 
sure, we 
may try 
both — of 
course in 2 
turn : tak- 
ing the 
longer 
way first, 
whilst we 
are fresh. 



el kcu fir) TreirXdirqaai irepi to. GerraAi/ca 7re8la, p. 264 

7T€7TVaaL yOVV KCU 7TICTT€V€L9 elvOLl. 

NE. 20. Ti pr]v ; 

HE. Tovo' IveKCL toi ttolvtol r)pu)Tr}aa TOLVTO., SlOTl d 
rr)s tcqv dyeXalcov rpo(f)rjs eaTi fiev evvSpov, can 8e 
/cat ij-qpofiaTiKOis. 

NE. 20. "Ecrri yap ovv. 

HE. 'Ap ovv kou aoi £vv8ok€i ravrr] 8elv 8u^a- 

{jELV Tr}V KOlVOTpO(f)lKr)v €7T ICTTr) fir}V ', €0' eKarepcp TOV- 

tcov to fiepo? avrr)? kirivifiovras eKarepov, to fiev 
erepov vypoTpo<fiiKov ovofidtpvTas, to 5' erepov i^r}po- 
Tpo(f)LKov ; 

NE. 20. "Efioiye. 

iSE. Kcu fir)v kcu to fiaaiXiKov ovtw? ov tflTr)- 
ao/iev biroTepas eaTi Trj? ri)(yrjs' SrjXov yap 8rj e 
iravTL. 

NE. 20. Um 8 ov ; 

SE. Ha? fiev Sr) to ye £r}poTpo(j)LKov Trj? dye- 
XaioTpofyias SieXoiT dv (j)vXov. 

NE. 20. n^y ; 

SE. Ta> TTTYjvcp T€ Kal ire(j£> diopiadfievos. 

NE. 20. ' K\r}6eo-TaTa. 

HE. Tt de' ; to ttoXltlkov *&>? nrepY* to ire^ov 



4. ToCS' evena rot] Cf. Theset. 
185 d : rov8e toi evena avrd croi 
diaKpi^ovfiai. 

5. (grjpoPariKov r.) The words 
ewbpov and £r]po@aTLK.6v are ap- 
plied to birds by Aristotle, in 
the only other place where the 
latter word occurs in classical 
Greek. H. A. vi. 2. § 1 (ubi 

VulgO gripofticoTiKov). 

14. Kal p.r)u Kal — iravri"] " If 

we divide thus, we shall also 



be saved the trouble of asking 
to which art the kingly func- 
tion belongs : for this will be 
evident to all," ovtcos = tovto 

7T0irjaavres. 

23. * cos nepl* to ire£6v] Stall- 
bauni is wrong in saying that 
Bekker took his reading el 7repl 
from the majority of MSS. 
The following are the varia- 
tions, as quoted by him : — el 

nepl ; axnrep E ; rj acrnep C et 



nOAITIKOS. 



Ti 



264. £qrr)Teov ; rj ovk o'lei koll rhv d(j)povearaTov cos eVoy 
elirew Boijdfikiv ovtcov ; 

NE. 20. "Eycoye. 

HE. T?}^ 8e 7retpvoi±LKr]V) Ka.0a.7rep apriou dpi- 
Ofxov, 8el Tep.vop.evriv 8tya dirofyaiveiv . 5 

NE. 20. ^\ou. 

HE. Kal /jlyju e(j) o ye fie'pos coppajKeir rjfiiv 6 
\6yos, eV €K€Li>o 8vo TLve KaOopav 68a> rerafie'va 
(J)aiveTai, rrjv /xeV Odrrco, 7rpos fieya fiepos a/JUKpoi' 
8LaLpov/j,€i>i]i>, ti-]v 8e, oirep ev ra irpocrOev eXeyofiev, 10 
otl 8ei fjLecroTOfieiv u>s fiaXiara, tout e\ovaav /uaA- 

265. \oi>, ixaKporepav ye fxrju. e^ecmv ovv, biroTepav av 
fiov\7]6ol>iiev, ravTTjv iropevOrjvaL. 



rcF; 17 (oo-jrep H ; toWep # r 
(i. e. the rest with Stephanus' 
eel.) Bekker's reading, el irepl 
t. ir., £rjTT)Teov, would be more 
plausible if Kal prjv — ov Cl T ^i~ 
aop.ev were immediately pre- 
ceding. Heindorf's, 9 nepl r. 
it. £., is not improbable in itself, 
but has weak MS. confirma- 
tion. 

If as nepl is right, this had 
probably been corrupted into 
<do-rrepii, and hence, through 
transposition, the variety. This 
reading involves a consider- 
able ellipse, viz. of rj ko.1 tovto 
8rj\ov; or the like words. Cf. 
Soph. 248 d : To fie, as, K.T.X., 
and note. 

4. Kaddnep apriov apiBpov ] 

Stallb. has adopted Ast's conj., 

Ka&dnep apri tov a., but such a 

reference would be superfluous 
and without point. The Stran- 
ger, as presently appears more 
clearly, does not forget the stu- 
dies in which young Socrates 



has been imbued by Theodoras, 
and uses ' even number' as a 
familiar example of that which 
can be halved : the object being 
still to divide each class as 
nearly as possible in the middle 
(peo-OTopelv infr., iv fjpio-eo-i — 
£r)Telo-6at. supr.). Comp. Legg. 
10, 895 e, cited by the Zurich 
editors, who are curiously mis- 
understood by Stallbaum. The 
definition of even number is 
there said to be 6 St^a 8iaipov- 
fievos. There is probably no 
distinct allusion to the former 
mention of clpriov Kal nepiT- 
rov. 

7. SpiiqKev] Cf. supi*. 262 b : 
in dvOpanovs nopevopevov. 

8. KaOopav — (paiverai] Sc. o 
hoyos, still personified. 

1 1. peo-orope'iv] The same love 
of ' measure' appears as an 
ethical notion in Legg. 7, 793 

a : tov Xvnrjs re Kal fjdovrjs aKpa- 
tov 0iov (pevyeiv 8elv ndvras, 
piaov hi riva repveiv del. 



E 2 



28 



I1AA10N02 



Gregarious 
tame ani- 
mals that 
walk the 
earth either 
have or 
have not 
horns. 
This dis- 
tinction is 
sufficiently 
intelligible 
without in- 
venting a 
name. 



NE. 20. 17 8e ; ap.(j)0T6pas a8vvaT0v ; p. 

HE. 'Afia y, w OavfxaaTC Iv fiepei ye p.r)v 
8r}Xov otl 8vvaTov. 

NE. 20. 'Ei> fiepei roivvv eycoye ap.(f)OTepa$ at- h 
spovfxat. 

HE. 'PaSiov, e7rei8r} rb Xonrov ftpayv. kut ap\as 
/xr)i> kou fieaovcTLV a/JLa rrjs iropeLas ^aXeirbv av rjv 
i)fiiv to 7rp6arayfJLa' vvv 8\ eVeiS?) 8oKel ravrr), rrjv 
HOLKpoTepav irporepov 'IcopLeV veaXearepot yap ovre? 
topaov avrrjv wopevcropeOa. rrjv 8e 8y 8iaip€<TLv opa. 
' NE. 20. Aeye. 
HE. Ta ire^a rjplv rwv rjp.eponv, oaairep ayeAoua, 
8irjprjp.eva iari (pvaei 8lya. 
NE. 20. T/w; 
15 HE. Tc3 tcov piev tt)v ylvecriv axepcov elvai, tcov 
8e Kepaacpopov. c 

NE. 20. Qaiverai. 

HE. Trjv 8r] TretpvopiKrjv 8ieXcov a.7ro8os eKarepcp 

rco pt-epei, Xoycp \ptop.evo9, av yap ovoptd^eiv avra 

20 fiovXrjOf)?, ecrrai aoi 7rep1.7re7rXeyp.evov pcaXXov tov 

8koVTOS. 



2. 3> 6avfj,acrT€^ " What a 
thing to ask !" This expres- 
sion throws some light on the 
common use of Z> davpaaie. 

4. aptpOTepas] TropevOrjvai is 

probably to be supplied. 

6. eTrei8rj — /3pavu] The poor 
youth is deceived into thinking 
that he is near the end of his 

journey : to 8° rjv apa, coy e'oiKe, 
irpoolptov. 

Kar dpxas] This is one of 
the expressions which occur 
frequently in the Politicus and 
Laws. 

0. veaXeo-repoi'] " While still 



fresh." See Passow or Liddell 
and Scott sub. v. 

1 5. rrjv yeveo-iv] " Their growth 
or mode of existence." yevecris 
here almost = <pv<ris. " In that 
some are produced without 
horns and others with them." 

18. <i7rdSoj] Sc. to 7rpoo-rJKOv, 
or ttjv irpoo-p-qa-iv, which would 
be generally ovopa, but here 
\6yov. Compare Antisthenes' 
sneer, that definition is only a 
roundabout way of naming. 

20. Trepnr(7r\(ypevov] E. g. 
Kepo<popovop.€VTiKT], KoXoftoKepaTO- 

vopiKT]. " Using description, 



I10AITIK02. 



29 



265. NE. 20. Fleas ovv xpi] Xeyeiv ; 

HE. C 06V ti]9 Trt{pvofiiKr)9 e7TLarrj/iy]^ °^X a $ laL - 
peOeiarjs to /utopiov Oarepov eVrt ra Kepocfjopco fiepei 
tw tyj9 aycXys i7riT6Ta.)(@cu, to Se erepov em ra> ti)s 
aKepdrov. 

NE. 20. TaDr eara) ravrr) Xe\6evTa' TrdvTcos 
d yap iKat'wy <5e&/Acoraf. 

HE. Kat /X771/ o ye fiaonXev? t)puv av Kara- 
(j)avrj9 otl koXo(3ov dyeXrjv tlvol KepaTcov vo- 
fxevet. 

NE. 20. ritoy yap ov SrjXo? ; 

HE. Tavrrjv tolvvv KaraOpavcravTes, to yiyvo- 
fievov avrco ireipcoixeda airobovvaL. 

NE. 20. Udvv ye. 

HE. Ylorepov ovv fiovXei tco a\LCTTcp re kcu tw 
KaXovp.evo') /xcovv^l Siaipelv avTyv i] rfj Koivoyovla re 
/cat Xhioyovla ; \xav6dveis yap irov. 

NE. 20. To ttoIov ; 

HE. "Ort to ptev tcov Ittttcov koi ovcov Tre<fivKev 
ilj aXXrjXtav yevvav. 
e NE. 20. No/. 



The king 
is the 
keeper <>f 
a hornless 
10 herd. But 
hornless 
cattle are 
again di- 
vided by a 
double dis- 
tinction : 
into those 
which mix 
the breed 
5 and divide 
not the 
hoof, and 
those which 
divide the 
foot and do 
not mix 
their breed. 



for should you attempt to name 
them, the result would be too 
complicated." The caution 
would apply still more point- 
edly to what follows. 

4. tco Ttjs aKepdrov] Sc. fiepei. 

The genitive of apposition is 
used (instead of tco aKepdra) by 
attraction from dyeXrjs prece- 
ding. 

9. KoXoftov — nepdrav] " A 
polled herd." The gen. after 
a privative adj., like o^oXkos 

do-TTl8cDV. 

12. to yiyvopevav] "That 

which falls to him." Cf. Legg. 1 1, 



920 C : Icjelv ~\rjpp.d re Ka\ dvd- 
Xcopa tL 7T0Te Tea Kcnrrp\co KepSos 
Troiet to peTpiov' ypd^avras 8e, 
6eivai to Yiyi'ou.ei'oi/ dvdXcojia kci\ 
\rjp.pa' Kai (pvXdTTew. lb. 12, 
949 d : to 8e vopiapa yiyvecr6ai 
TJj noXei. Thuc. V. 49 : 6 tco 
6eco ylyverai avrol inep ineivcov 
eKricreiVi 

15. tco Kcikovpevcp pcovv^i] This 

expression indicates the fact 
that pebw^ was a rare 'word out 
of Homer. The characteristic 
of having solid hoofs is found 
to be coincident with that of 
making hybrids. 



30 



nAATON02 



The latter 
description 
includes 
only two 
kinds. 
For dogs, 
though so- 
ciable, are 
not grega- 
rious. The 
ground of 
distinction 
between 
these two 
should be 
obvious to 
a friend of 
Theretetus 
and a geo- 
metrician. 
Man walks 
by a power 
of two feet: 
the remain- 
ing kind is 
potentially 
represent- 
ed by the 



mE. To 6Y ye Xonrov eTi t^s - Ae/a? dyeAi]? tcdv p. 
?]fMpcoi> dfiiye? yevei 7rpbs dXXrjXa. 

NE. 20. Ylw t? ov ; 

iHE. Tt 6° ; 6 7to\ltikos ap eVrt/xe'Aetaz/ eytw 
S (pcLLveraL iroTepa Koivoyevovs (frvaeco? rj rivos \8lo- 
yevovs ; 

NE. 20. ArjXoU OTL TYJ9 dflLKTOV. 

mE. TavTrju 8r) 8el Kaddwep rd e/nrpoorOev, &>? 
hoiKev, rjfids oV^a cWcrre'AAetJ/. 
io NE. 20. Aet yap ovv. 

SE. Kat firjv to ye ftaov, ocrov rjfiepov /cat dye- p. 
Xahv, o~)(eSoi> irXrjv yevolv 8volv irdv rj8r) KaraKeKep- 
fiano-Tcci. to yap tS>v Kwcav ovk eird^iov /car- 
api6p.elv yevos coy ev dyeXaiois OpefipLaaiv. 
15 NE. 20. Ov yap ovv. dXXa t'ivl 8rj tco 8vo 
8iaipovp.ev ; 

HE. 'Qnrep /cat 8iKaiov ye QeaiTrjTov re /cat ere 
8iave/ieiv, eVetS?) /cat yecofieTpias diTTecrOov. 
NE. 20. Tco ; 
20 ££E. Tfj 8ia/JLeTpcp 8r]Trov /cat irdXiv Trj r^y 8ta~ 
fxeTpov 8iaj±eTpop. 



1. eVt] When the horse 
and ass are taken from the 
hornless cattle. 

Xe/as] I. e. KoXofioKepaTOv. 

2. apiyes yevei] " Do not mix 
their breed." Dat. of the mode, 
like (pvo-ei. 

4. 6 noXiriKos ap'] For the 
late position of the interroga- 
tive 7rdrepa in the sentence, 
compare Soph. 237 c : e'x €lv ^°- 
Kovfxeu hv els ti, and note. Supr. 
261 C : \eyeis 8e — norepov. Rep. 
9, 57 I C : Aeyeis 8e Kal rlvas ; 

17. biKaiov] " It is to be ex- 



pected of you." Cf. Meno 85 e : 

dlicaios yap el elbevai. 

20. Tfj 8iap.eTpa> Btjttov] The 
diameter of the unit square was 
the subject of some of the ear- 
liest lessons in that geometrical 
arithmetic through which alone 
numbers had hitherto been stu- 
died : and it had been observed 
that this diameter is equal to 
the square-root of two. Hence, 
a foot being always the unit, 
this line was known both as rj 
Sidperpos and as f] Bidperpos rj 
dvvdp.ei Sinovs : and it is the 



nOAITIKOS. 



81 



%66. NE. 20. Tlwy ewres ; 

b HE. 'H (J)v(tls, rjv to yivos t'lficov tgov uvOpwiroiv 

K€KT7]Tat, pLCOV CtAAo)? 7TQ)S €1? TtjV TTOpdaV 7T€(j)VK€V T) 

KaOoarep y diapLerpo? y Swa/iet. dinovs ; 
NE. 20. Ovk aAAwy. 
S?E. Kat /xt)j/ 77 ye rou Kolttov yevovs Tcakiv iari 



abbreviated form of the latter 
expression, viz. 8lnovs Bvvapis, 
which gives occasion to the 
Stranger's somewhat laborious 
pleasantry. 

The incommensurability of 
this diameter with the side of 
the square (of */ 2 with i) was 
one of the most familiar lessons 
of this early geometry. Hence, 
possibly a , the omission of 2 
amongst the irpoprjiceis apidfidi 
in the demonstration of Theo- 
doras (Theset. 147 d : rrjs re rp'i 
nodos rrepi Ka\ nevTeTTodos K.T.A.), 

it being taken for granted, 
without proof, that the dlrrovs 
dvvapis Was pr]K.a. ov £vpp.(Tpos 
rjj 7ro8iaia. 

While these were still recent 
discoveries, philosophers were 
led to see fanciful analogies to 
them in other departments of 
knowledge. Plato here satir- 
izes a tendency from which he 
was not at this time himself 
wholly free. The smile is al- 
ready on his face which pre- 
sently breaks into a laugh. 

Our view has been restricted 
to tame gregarious animals : 
to tame animals that tread the 
ground, that cannot fly, that 
have no horns, that divide the 
foot : thus oxen, horses, asses 
are excluded ; dogs are not gre- 
garious. What remain 1 What 
but swine and men 1 Human 



progression is measured by the 
power of two feet, that of 
swine, the only remaining ani- 
mal, by the power of four. This 
interpretation has been well 
supported by Dr. Badham in 
the ' Epistola' prefixed to his 
edition of the Euthydemus and 
Laches. 

1. Hwr fines ;] " What did 
you say 1 ?" Expressing a not 
very unnatural surprise. 

6. e'crri Kara 8vvap.1v av ttjs 
riperepas 8vvdpecos 8idperpos] "Is 

again potentially expressed by 
the diameter of our diameter," 
i.e. the diameter of the square of 
which our diameter, a/ 2, is the 
side. As the diameter of the 
unit square is */2, so the dia- 
meter of the square of ^/ 2 is 
-v/4- This appears, without 
the help of arithmetic, from 
the following diagram : 

A. 




f 
ab 1 square foot ; c d dia- 
meter of a b, and side of 2 ft. 
square dee; de diameter of 
2 ft. square ; df square on 
d e : = 4 square feet. 

a As suggested by a favourable critic in the National Review. 



of 

buman 
power or, 

in o! Ii r 
word . 

1 1 
a power of 
j low 



32 



IIAATQN02 



Tims man 
is differen- 
tiated from 
the pig. 



Kara hvvay.iv av rrj? rjperepa? Svvdpeco? Sidperpo?, p. 266. 
eiirtp Svoiv ye ean ttoSolv SI? ?re(f)VKvla. 

NE. 20. Ylco? 6° ovk earn ; kcii Sr] kou o~)(eSbv 
o fiov\ei SrjXovv pav&dvco. 

5 mE. n.pOS Si] TOVTOl? €T€pOV av Tl TCOV TV p09 

yeXcora evSoKip-rjaavToov av, co ^(DKpare?, dpa KaOo- 
pcofiev rjplv yeyovo? iv tols Siyprfpevot? ', c 

NE. SO. To ttoIov ; 

SE. TdvOpwiTLvov rjpcov dpa yevo? ^vveiXrj-^b? 
10 Kal ^vvSeSpapLrjKO? yevei rw tcov ovtcov yevvaioTaray 
kolL dfia evyepeaTaTco. 



5. erepov av] Those who 

have found in these words a 
new division, and would intro- 
duce here some fresh kind, — 
as geese or other domestic fowls 
(Ast, Stallhaum), which were 
cut off, supr. 264 e, or apes 
(Winkelmann), which as tame 
animals are hardly dye\aia 6pep- 
fiara, unless M. Winkelmann 
can find the prototype of Bea- 
trice and her apes in classic 
story, — were right in supposing 
that a distinct step in the ar- 
gument must be here indi- 
cated. Man has been distin- 
guished in terms of mathema- 
tical progression from the only 
remaining quadruped, the pig. 
But it remains to be shewn of 
which kind the king is herds- 
man. It has been determined 
what two kinds are still in 
competition. But the result of 
their competition remains to 
be decided. 

tcov ivpos ye~ka>ra evboKLfirjadp- 
tiov dv] " Which might have 
become celebrated as a joke." 
" 'Might have won us a fellow- 
ship in a cry' of humourists." 



npos yeXcora lit. " In respect 
of the purpose of creating 
laughter." 

9. f]p.a>v] Qu. an leg. ww, 
cf. Soph. 217c, where the same 
doubt occurs. " That it should 
be the lot of our human family 
to run a heat with the grandest, 
and at the same time the least 
fastidious, of all creatures." 

gweikrixds] " Having been 
appointed by lot to run with." 
Cf. Hdt. V. 2 2 : avve^emnTe t£> 

rrpccTO), and Schw. Lex. Hdt. 

S. V. CTVV€K77iTTTeil>. 

10. yevvaLOTara) is ironical. Cf. 
Rep. 7 > 5 2 9 h : ovk dyevvcbs p.01 

SoKeZy ttjv nepl to. civco pdOrjcriv 

\ap[3dveiv Trapa aavrco fj ecm. 
But there is perhaps a humoi'- 
ous allusion (as Badham sup^- 
poses) to the unwieldy bulk 
of the creature. 

11. evxepe o-rdrco ] Whereas 
man, as it was said in the 
Thesetetus, is 8vo-ko\ov Kal im- 
fiovKov £5iov. Schleiermacher 
well quotes Bep. 7, 535 e : ev- 

Xep&s, cbvrrep 6rjpiov veiov — iv 

dp.adla p,o\vvrjrai. The conjec- 
ture yevvaioraTov is quite un- 



nOAITIKOS. 



88 



266. NE. 20. Ka$opa> Kai paX aToirtos tjvpfiaivov. 

mE. TV cT ; ot)/c tf/co? varara a(\)LKveio-Qai tu. 
(3pa8uraTa ; 

NE. 20. Ncu, rouro ye. 

37 E. Tooe »5e oi)/c ivvoovpev, cos eri yeXoioTepos 5 
6 fiaaiAev? (patveTai pera rijs dyt/\r)$ IjvvSiaOc-'cov 
kcu tjvvSpo/Jia TreTropevpLevos tco tcov dv8pcov av irpos 
d rov ev)(€prj ft'iov aptcna yeyvpLva.crp.evco ; 

NE. 20. na^raVa<7£ /xeV ovv. 

37E. Nw yap, co ^coKpares, eKelvo Ictti Kara- 10 
(paves p.dXXov to prjOev tot eV Trj irep). tov ao(pLCTTr)v 

&Tr}CT€l. 



called for. There is no real 
difficulty in the coordination of 

yevvaioraTO) with evxepeo-ri'iTcp, 

and the echo in yevet yew. is 
clearly intentional, as in 17 yevei 
yewaia <ro(f)i(TTLKr]. The two are 
thrown together by lot ; they 
run a race together : which is 
left behind 1 Clearly the slower 
animal, the pig. But the race 
between men and pigs involved 
a still more ridiculous race be- 
tween two sorts of men, the 
king and the swineherd. Thus 
his majesty is found contending 
for sovereignty with one of his 
flock (a phenomenon which will 
be repeated presently, cf. 267 e), 
and with one who has been most 
perfectly trained to lead a life 
of careless ease : Ulysses with 
that opxa/ios avhpSiv Euroaeus. 

6. pera rr/s dye\r)s] I. e. t£>v 
dye\aia>v Tivi. Cf. Hipp. Maj. 
288 d : ov ko/jl^-os dXAa avpepe- 
tos. Illfr. 268 a: ov povov dye- 
Xaiav dvdpdmatv dXka Kai rmv 
apxovroov civt5)v. 

That man should be the con- 
gener of the pig is in keeping 



with the humour of Theset. 

l6l C : otl tvuvtcov xprjpdrav pe- 
rpov eo-Tiv vs k.t.'K. And the 
race between the king and the 
swineherd recals another touch 
of satire in the same dialogue, 

(174 d) : ftacrikea eyKtopia£6pevov 

OLOV (JVJ3u>Tt]U. 

7. av] I. e. As the pig was 

ev^eptaraTou tcov 0T)piu>v. 

Tip. t. e. (3. yeyvp. is an OXy- 
•moroil. For yeyvpvacrpevco irpos, 
cf. Legg. i, 626 b : koXcqs ye & 
£eve, (paivei poi yeyvpvdcrdai npos 
to hieihe'vai to. Kprjrcov vopipa. 

Compare with the preceding- 
classification the fourfold divi- 
sion of living creatures accord- 
ing to the four elements in Tim. 

40 a : pla pev ovpavitov 6eiov 
yevos, ci\\r) 8e kttjvov Kai depo- 
iropov, Tpirr) he evvbpbv eihos, 
Tte^bv he Kai xepaalov reraprov. 

10. Nvv yap] A collateral in- 
ference is sometimes stated as 
a cause, e. g. Gorg. 454 d : Aq- 

\ov yap av otl ov tovtou eo~Tiv. 

Badham would read ye apa in 
all such cases. 

11. ev Tt) — ^TTjaei] Soph. 



run J 1. I i t • •! 

11 tlic nice. 



Man win-, 
the 1 nil 
ning ni.iti'li, 
of course. 
But tliis 
Btrange 
race be- 
t w < in men 

ami pig8 

is accom- 
panied by 

one more 
absurd, be- 
tween the 
king and 
the swine- 
herd, who, 
of all his 
subjects is 



34 



IIAATONOS 



most com- 
pletely 
trained to 

a life of 
careless 
ease. 

Certainly, 
as was .said 
this morn- 
ing, Dialec- 
tic prefers 
truth to 
dignity. 



Now for 
the shorter 
way. 



NE. 20. To TToiov ; p. 

HE. 'Otl rf) Tota8e fieOoSo) row Xoycov ovre 
aep,vorepov fiaXXov epeX-qaev ?) prj, tov re afxiKpo- 
Tepov ov8ev r)Ti/xaK€ irpb tov /ue/^b^oy, del 8e ko.6 
5 avTi)v Trepaivet TaXtjOecrTaTOV. 
NE. 20. "Eoucev. 

HE. OvKOVV fX€Ta TOVTO, "iVCL flT) fl€ (frOf}? epoj- 

r-qaas ttjv fipa)(UT€pav 68hv rjrts tote rjv eVt tov tov 
fiaaiAecos bpov, olvtos uoi irportpov eXdco ; e 

io NE. 20. 20o6> ye. 

HE. Aeyco 8rj 8elv Tore evOvs to ire^ov tco 8l7to8l 
irpos [to] TeTpdirovv yivos Siaveificu, kclt&ovtcl 8e 

TCLvOpteTTLVOV €Tl /JLOVCp TCp 7TTT}VCO ^VVElXtJ^O? T7]V 

8nro8a dyeXrjv ttolXlv tco \jfi\cp kcu ra TTTEpo- 

[c,(f)veL te'/jlveiv, Tp.rj6eicrr)s 8e avTrj? koll tot rf8r) ttjs 

avdpomovopLiKrjs 8r)XcQ0Eio-r]? te\vyj9, (pEpovTa tov 



227 b, where the spirit of scien- 
tific method and that of satire 
interpenetrate as they do here, 
so that it can be hardly known 
which of them is made the 
vehicle of the other. 

3. fj firj\ Sc. aep.vorepov. 

II. tots evdvs to 7re£6v] It is 
impossible to exj)lain this pas- 
sage so as to acquit the Stran- 
ger of inexactness. Either he 
has forgotten that the class of 
winged creatures was cut off 
(264 e), or he purposely begins 
the shorter path from an earlier 
point than where he gave no- 
tice of the existence of the two 
ways. Pei-haps the words roVe 
eZ6vs may imply this (cf. supr. 
263 e). In any case the word 
Tre(6v is used in a different sense 
from that in which it occurs 
above, where it was opposed to 



the same nrrjva which it here 
includes. Tre^o'v is therefore = 
gr]po&aTiKnv, and opposed to 
ewbpov, " on land," not " on the 
ground," by an ambiguity like 
that which belongs to the 
same word when applied to 
an armament. Cf. infr. 267 b: 
TregovopiKov. This ambiguity 
probably gives rise to the in- 
exact reference. Compare Rep. 

I, 354 : epneaovros av varepou 

\6yov — where the theory spo- 
ken of, although discussed later, 
had been introduced before the 
other. Soph. 223 d, 224 c : 
pera^XrjTiKr]. Such slight inac- 
curacies perhaps do not arise 
from mere neglect : they are 
caused by Plato's instinctive 
avoidance of an over-exactness, 
which would be unnatural in 
conversation. 



nOAlTIKOS. 



8fi 



266. ttoXltlkov kcu fiaaiXiKov, oiov rjvio\ov eh avTi)v 
ivcmjcravTa, TrapaSovvai ras Trjs iroXttos rjvias, coy 
olKela? koll aura) tolvtt]? ovo-qs rrjs emo-Tr/pLr)?. 
7. NE. 213. KaAcoy kol KaOairepei \peos ovreScoKas 
p.01 tov Xoyov, irpoaOeis ti]v eKTpoir^v oiov tokov koll, 
avairXrjpcDcras amov. 

3?E. (fre'pe Srj, kcu ^vveipco/xev iiraveXOovres hri 
rrjv dp^rjv /* e 'x/° f r ^ s> re ^ e ^7"^ tov Xoyov tov ovo- 
/JLaro? rrjs tov ttoXltlkov Te^yr)^. 

NE. 20. Ylctvv fiev ovv. 

SE. T^y yvwo-TiKrjs to'lvvv liviO'Tr\p.r]<i rjfuv rjv 
kclt dpxas pLepo? lirLTaKTLKOV tovtov 8e careLKacrOev 



mid 



Land-fl 

lll.llriHll 

have been 
first divided 
into biped 
and quad- 
ruped : 
then bipedi 
into fledged 
and naked. 
And, when 
man bad 
been thus 
distin- 
guished a - 

(he Ii!j/C.i 

implwme, 

t tlie States- 
man, as the 
man -herd, 
should have 
been en- 
trusted 



1. oiov — iv(TTJ](TavT(i^ For the 
two participles, cf. Protag. 328 
c : e\0wv els lepoV, 6u,6o-as, ocrov 
dv Cpf) a£ia elvai ra padrjpara, 
to<tovtoi> KareSrjKfv. 

2. Trapa8ovvtu — enio-Tr]pT]sj 
" To give into his hands the 
reins of the state, believing 
that they are his, and that this 
art belongs to him." (ravTr/s 

SC. ttjs dvdpconovopiKrjs.) 

g. 7TpOO~8e\s TT)V eKTpOTTTjv] Cf. 

Legg.3, 683 a : vvv ovv 8tj toctov- 
tov irXeoveKTovpev 777 nXdvy tov 
Xoyov. 

oiov tokov] " By way of in- 
terest." Cf. Rep. 6, 507 a : (3ov- 

Xoiprjv civ, einov, epe Te 8vvao~6ai 
dno8ovvai feat vpds KopicraaBai^ 
dXXd prj &>o-Trep vvv tovs tokovs 
povov. tovtov 8e S17 ovv tov tokov 
Te kcu eKyovov avTov tov dyadov 
Kopio-aade. evXaj3elo-0e pevToi, prj 
7777 e^anaTrja-co vpds, KLJ38r]Xov drro- 
818011s tov Xoyov tov tokov. dva- 
7r\r]pa>o~as avTov SC. tov Xoyov. 

" Having given the tale in 
full." Cf. Symp. 188 e: « n 

H-eXnrov, dvcnrXrjpwcrai. The 



" shorter path" might have 
seemed too bare if given 
alone. 

7. &epe 8fj Ka\ £vvelpcopev] 

" Come, now let us proceed to 
link together." Cf. Soph. 224 

d : 101 vvv avvaydycopev avTO. 

For the idiomatic kcu, cf. Soph. 

Aj. 803 : e'l Tco Ka\ Xcyi^eadai 
a^oXr], 

8. tov Xoyov tov ovopctTos] 
" The definition of the name." 
The words are emphatically 
repeated in order to fami- 
liarize the distinction between 
Xo'-yos and ovopa. Cf. Soph. 218 
C : Set 8e del navTos nepi to 
irpdypa qvto pdXXov 8td Xoycov 
r) Tovvopa povov avvopoXoyr)- 
o~ao~6ai x^P 15 Xoyov. 

1 2. dneiKaaBevj " Having been 
illustrated by an analogy :" viz. 
that of the avTonaXeis. Supr. 

260 e : 17 fiovXei, KaQdirep elKa- 
£opev vvv S17, Kat Tovvopa napeiKa- 
(rcopev. Cf. Soph. 221 b: an 
avrrjs Ttjs irpatjecos dqbopoicodev 
Tovvopa. 



F 2 



S6 



IIAAT0N02 



TO /JLOpiOV aVT€7TtTaKTLK(W tpprjOl], £(00Tp0(f)lKr) Se p. 
TTOlXlV aVT€irLTaKTLKrj9 OV TO (TjllKpOTOLTOV tcov ytvoiv b 

a7reo-^/^ero* kcu £ojoTpo(j)iKr)S ei8o? dyeXaiOTpocfjiKOi/, 
ayeXaior po(j)LKOv <5' av ttc^ovojilkov. tov Se iretpvo- 

5 flLKOV fldAlCTTa d7T€T€pi>€T0 TtyVT) TX]<i UKtpOLTOV (f)V- 
CT6C09 OpeiTTLKT]. TaVTT)<? 8" CLV TO /JLtpO? OVK ekciTTOV 

TptirXovv o~v/jL7rXeK€iv avayKouov, av ei? tv tls olvto 
ovofia ^vvayayfiv (3ovXt]0fj, yevecrews *ap.iKTOv vopttv- 
tiktjv* €7rio-Tr}/jLrji> irpoaayopevwv. to & carb tovtov 
10 TprjpLa, eir) iroipLvr) 8l7to8l fie'pos dv6p(x)7rovopiLKbv eri c 
XtKpOev fiovov, tovt avTO io~Tiv rjdr) to fyjTrjBev, ap.a 
fiacrL\iKov tglvto kXyjOcv /ecu ttoXltlkov. 

NE. 20. YlavTairaaL ptev ovv. 

HE, 'Apd y, co Sco/cparfS", dXiqOcos rjpuv tovto, 



267.2' 



4. dyeXaiorpocpiKov S' av 
7reCovofXiKov] Vid. supr. 264 e. 
The gregarious were first di- 
vided into land and water ani- 
mals, and then land animals 
into fledged and unfledged, to 
Avhich latter the word ne(6v 
was applied. These two steps 
are here remembered as one 
only: the second of the two 
distinctions being dropped, and 
the word 7re£oi> being under- 
stood to mean " on land." This 
confirms what has been said 
above in the note on p. 
266 d. 

6. ovk eXaTTOv rpnrXovv] This 

is the reading of ten MSS., 
including the best, and is re- 
presented in the version of 
Ficinus, who probably joined 
to [iepos ovk eXarrov (ov) (" par- 
tem nequaquam minorem." Cf. 
supr. ov to arp.iKpoTa.Tov tcov ye- 
va>v), which, however, is in- 
consistent with the context, 



and hardly grammatical. It 
seems most probable that we 
have here an unusual construc- 
tion, of which another instance 
occurs in Legg. 12, 956 e: 
v(pfjv 8e pi) nXeov i'pyov yvvaiKos 
pias ep.p.r]vov, where there is no 
difference of reading. Cf. supr. 
265 c. Three MSS., H2Y, 
have rpinXov, which Stallbaum 
adopts. 

8. For yeveaeas, cf. SUpr. 

261 d, infr. 271 a. 

MSS. fiiKTov vopevriKr/s. The 

correction is due to Boeckh 
and Heindorf. 

10. em TTo'ipvrj 8l7to8i] This 
is the point where the two 
ways meet. " The art of man- 
herding being the only portion 
left which has to do with 
bipeds." 

11. ajia — ttoXltlk6v\ Accord- 
ing to what was said at first : 
259 c. 



nOAITIKOS. 



87 



267. KaOajrep av vvv elprjKas, ovtco? iar\ kui irtirpa- 
ypcevov ; 

NE. 20. To 7T010V $Y) ; 

HE. To TravToaraaiv iKavco? eiprjadai to irpo- 
TeOev. 7) tovt aura kcu paXiaTa ?} tyrrjcri? eXXei7rei, 5 
to tov Xoyov elprjadai pcev wcos, ov prjv iravTairaaL 
ye TeXecos careipydaOai ; 
d NE. 20. rtwy ewres- ; 

HE. 'Eyco &w Treipdo-opou tout avTO, o diavoov- 
/LLai vvv eri fxaXXov SrjXcJocrca. IO 

NE. 20. Aeyotf eu>. 

HE. Ou/cow tcov vofievTLKwv rjplv woXXcov (pavei- 
acov apTL Teyvwv put Tis rjv 1) ttoXltikt) kcu fuels 
tivos dyeXi]$ eiripeXeia ; 

NE. 20. Nat. I5 

HE. TavTrjv 8e ye Sicopi^ev 6 Xoyos ov\ tirwcov 
elvai Tpocpov ovd' aXXcov Orjplcov, aAA' dv6pco7rcov 

KOlVOTpOfpLKTjV eiT LCTTY] prjV . 

NE. 20. Ovrm. 



But it is 
not really 
at an end. 



For, when 
the king is 
designated 
as the Man- 
herd, it 
must not 
be forgot- 
ten that he 



I. KaBanep ov vvv ei'pijKas] Sc. 
TrnvTcnra.cn. Cf. Soph. 2l8 a. 
" Have we really (kcu) done as 
you say 1 " 

4. to rrpoTfdev] Cf. Soph. 2 1 8 
e : tL BrjTa TrpoTCt^aiped' civ. 

5. fj tovt avTO cnreipyao6ai\ 

" Or is it in this very respect 
that our inquiry is especially 
defective, that the definition 
has in a way been given, but 
still has not entirely received 
final completion 1 ?" Cf. infr. 

277 b : d.Te)(va)s 6 Xdyos rjplv 

coorrep £a>ov — tt]V ivdpyciav ovk 

cnrfi\r](pevai tto). 

9. vmv ] Dialectic makes 
the subject of inquiry clearer 



to both the minds which are 
engaged. 

Treipa.oop.ai. tovt a\)To\ " I 

will endeavour to do this very 
thing, to make my meaning 
at this moment clearer for us 
both." I. e. I will endeavour to 
give my present thought, what 
I desiderate for the main argu- 
ment, a complete expression. 

17. ovo' aXXcov 6T)p'ia)v\ He 

falls back into the common 
parlance for want of a col- 
lective word to express "ani- 
mals other than man." There 
is less danger in this, now 
that the requisite distinctions 
have been made. 



riAATONOI 



is unlike 
other 
herdsmen 
in this, thai 
he is not 
alone in 
feeding or 
in tending 
his flock, 

but has 
many com- 
petitors, 
such as the 
merchant, 
husband- 
man, baker, 
gymnast, 
physician. 



aR. To 8t) tow vofitaiv ttolvtojv 8id(j)opov> koll to p. 
twv fiao-iAecov Oeaaco/xeOa. e 

NE. 20. To ttoIov ; 

SE. El' Ti$ tcov clWodv ro), Te'xvr)? a\Xr}9 ovopa 
5 e\oou, KOivf) tyjs ayeXrjS ^vvTpotyos elvai (j)rjo-l koll 
TrpocnroieiTai. 

NE. 2D. Um 07/9 ; 

SE. Giov 01 6fJL7TOpOL KOLL yecopyol KOLL CTlTOVpyOL 

7rdi>Te?, koll irpos tovtols yvpLvaaTOLL koll to twv 
■olaTpwv yevos, olxrd* otl toIs nepl tol avOpocnrLva 
i>oiJ.evcrLV, ovs ttoXltlkovs iKaXecrafiep, iravTOLTraorL 
too Xoyco SiapLoixoLPT av ovtol avp,7rai>T€9, 00? afals p. 



268 



I. To 8r) tcov vupiiov\ It has 

been assumed that the king is 
a herdsman of men, but it is 
now found necessary to distin- 
guish the king from the herds- 
man. In this curious form the 
imperfect conditions of human 
government are indicated. 

7rdvT<ov~\ I.e. All beside the 
king. 

4. Ei' tis tcov oKXcov t<u] This 
reading, which has been pre- 
served in three or four MSS. 
(rS B, no AFH, tco corr. n), 
and would have been extremely 
probable if due only to conjec- 
ture, has been unaccountably 
overlooked. to ciXXr/s rexvrjs 
ovofia, if not a solecism, is 
very harsh Greek, while to ttjs 
aXkrjs t. (2Y), repeating the 
article, has no meaning. Stall- 
baum translates : " Num. quis 
reliquorum alius artis nomen 
gerens communiter gregis so- 
cium sese esse et dicat et si- 
mulat," and adds, that the 
meaning of this ought to be 
plain to all from what follows. 



He probably means that the 
king, unlike other artists (it 
should be "herdsmen"), is not 
distinguishable in some re- 
spects when thus defined from 
individuals amongst his flock 
(the physician, gymnast, etc.). 
He runs a race with them, as 
he did with the swine-herd. 
But this is an extremely 
vague way of putting what is 
presently explained. Whereas 
the above reading makes all 
clear. " I mean, whether in 
the case of any of the other 
herdsmen there be any one, 
bearing the name of a differ- 
ent art, who professes and pre- 
tends to share in common with 
him the tending of the herd." 

5. gvvTpotfios is to be taken 
actively, as appears from rijs 

Tpo(prjs emp.e\ovvTas below, and 

a-vvvoprji infr. 268 c. Cf. Legg. 
8, 845 d : ovre yap yrjv ovre 
i)\iov oifre irvevpaTa, rois vdaai 
crvvTpocpa twv e/c yrjs dvaj3Xa(TTav- 

OVT(OV. 

12. tco Xoyco 8iap.dxoivT av] 



IIOAITIKOS. 



$9 



268. Trjs TpofyrjS tTUfieXoVVTOLL TYjS UV0[XOiriVT)9) OV fXOVOV 

dyeXaiwv dvOpamuiv dXXa /cat ti]s tcou dpyovraw 
avTcov ; 

NE. 20. Ovkovv 6p0G)? av Xeyoiev ; 
aE. 'Iotw?. /cat rouro //eV €7riaK€\j/6/ie0a, ro8e 8e5 
Xapev, otl fiovKoXcp ye ovdei? d/JLCpiafir/TrjcreL irep\ 
tovtcou ovftevos, aAA' auroy Trjs dyeXr]? rpo(f)os 6 
/3ou0op/3oy, avrb? iarpos, avros olov vv/Kpevrrj^ /cat 
b irep\ tovs rwv yiyvop.evoav tokovs /cat Aortas* p.ovos 
hn(rrrj\x(xiv ttjs paLeuTLKrj?. en rolvvv irouftias /cat 10 
IxovcriKrjs i(f) oaov avrov rd Ope/i/iara (pvaeL /jl€T€l- 
Xr](f)ev, ovk dXAos KpeiTTcov TrapapvOelaOai /cat ktjXcov 
TTpavvew, pLerd re opydvtov /cat ^tAw rc5 aTOfiarc r-qv 
tyjs avrov Troipviqs dpiara pLerayeLpitpiievos p.oucriKrji>. 
/cat 8rj /cat twv dXXwv irepi vofiecov 6 avros rpoiros. 15 

v yap; 



"Would contend in argument." 
Cf. Theset. 1 60 e and note ; and 
see \eyoiev infra. 

(12.) ovtoi <xvyiTravT(s\ Pleo- 
nastic resumption. 

2. dycXalcov] Cf. SUpr. 260 C. 

6. 13ovk6\co] So also Bodl., 
omitting rw. For avros — avros, 
cf. Rep. 2, 383 d. 

9. rwv yiyvofjLevwv] u The off- 
spring from time to time." 
Cf. Thea?t. 1 60 e : fif) \d6r) i^a? 

ovk d^iov ov rpocprjs to yiyvoftevop. 

10. en roivvv] " Nay, even 
beyond the sphere of the arts 
which were mentioned as com- 
peting with the king." 

Traidias ku\ p-ovo-iKrjs] Music 
and the arts generally are iro- 
nically spoken of as a kind of 
child's-play. Cf. Soph. 224 a, 
234 a, b. The genitives are 
suggested by emo-Trmcov, but as 



Nut bo the 
ox-herd, 
who is suf- 
ficient in 

all things 
for his 
cattle, to 
supply 
their wants, 
to heal 
their sick- 
nesses, to 
attend 
them in the 
hour of 
marriage 
and of 
childbirth. 
He pro- 
vides also 
for their 
amusement 
by rustic 
melodies, 



the sentence proceeds are un- 
derstood to be governed by 

perei\Tj(pe. 

II. airov tci dpcp/jara] " The 

objects of his care." dpippara 
has the common meaning of 
" creatures" with an etymo- 
logical association from the 
verbal meaning, as the cattle 
are viewed in relation to the 
herdsman. 

13. perd Te opydvcov kcu \j/i\u> 

to> arop-aTi] The meaning of 
y{/i\6s depends on that to which 
it is opposed or correlative. In 
Legg. 2, 669 d, instrumental 
music without the voice is 

spoken of as ^tXf? Kadapiaei re 

kcu avXrjo-ei, and is strongly ob- 
jected to : while Xo'yot \j/t\oi in 
the same passage are words 
without metre, or prose. 

15. tcov n'AXcov Tre'pi vo/zeW] 



40 



I1AAT0NO2 



sung or 
whistled, 
or " attem- 
pered tn 

tin- oaten 
Hut.." And 
thus do all 
herdsmen 
pxcepl the 
king of 
men : who 
cannot 
therefore 
be ade- 
quately de- 
fined until 
we have 
parted off 
from him 
this crowd 
of rivals, 
and set 
him forth 
alone and 
clear. For 



NE. 20. 'OpOorara. ]> 

HE. rico? ovv i)fXLu u Xoyos 6p6o$ (j)avelTUL kou 
UKepaio? 6 7repl tov /3acnAeW, otolv avrov vopcea kou 

TpO(j)OU dytXrjS avOpGdTTLVriS 6£>ptV p.OVOV £KKplVOVT€S c 

5 pvpcoov dXXcov dp(f)ta(3i]TovvTO)v ; 
NE. 20. OvScLfim. 

HE. Ovkovv opOcos oXiyov epurpocrOev e(J)ofir]Or}- 
pev v7ro7TT6vaai>Te? per) Xtyovres pev rt Tvyyavoiptv 
ayr]p.a fiaaiXiKOv, ov pi]v dneipyaG p.evoL ye elpev iron 
ioSi aKpifielas tov woXltlkov, eco? av rovs 7T€piK€)(v- 
pevovs olvtw kou tyjs avvvopjjs avrcp dvTLTroiovpevovs 
7repteXoPT€9 kou yapiaavTes drr eKetvcov Kadapov 
povov ovtov diro^vcopev ; 



26h 



Either nepl is pleonastic (ut 
ssepe) or the genitive is to be 
repeated with rponos. 

3. aKepaios] " Perfect, with- 
out a flaw." " How is our 
definition not impaired by the 
circumstance, — 1" Cf. Rep. 

I, 342 b : d[3\afii)s kci\ anepaios 
i(TTiv opQrj ovcra (17 Te^vrj), 

4. povov eKKplvovTfs] Cf. infr. 
303 b : ttuo~u>v yap eKelvrjv ye c'k- 
Kpireov. 

7. dXiyov eprrpoadev] 267 C, d. 
e'(poj3T]dr]pev vnonTevaavTes] Cf. 

Soph. 264 b. 

9. o~xrjpa fiacrChiKov — St' anpi- 
(3elas tov ttoXitikov] " The form 
we described was indeed royal, 
but did not accurately corre- 
spond with that of the States- 
man." It appears presently 
that Ave have been imagining 
the Divine Shepherd of the 
people as he existed in the 
golden age. 

10. ivepiKexvpivovs] " Cl'OAvd- 
ing in upon him." Compare 
the description in the Gorgias, 



p. 452 a, of the physician, the 
gymnast, and the moneymaker 
disputing the claim of the 
rhetor to be the agent of the 
greatest good for man. on croi 

civt'ik av irapao-Taiev k.t.X. Also 

ib. 456. A still nearer parallel 
occurs in the sixth book of 
the Republic, Avhere the true 
philosophers are Avith difficulty 
separated from the pretenders 
to philosophy. Cf. esp. Rep. 
6, 488 C : avToiis oe del tu vav- 
Kkrjpa) 7iepiKCxyo-8ai oeopevovs 

k.t.X. And see Ar. Pol. IV. 

12 : "Eo-ti 8e ov8e tovto Stop'tacit. 
pdoiov, Tvoias Set KaXt'iv dp%ds' noX- 
Xaiv yap emaTarav rj itoXitiktj koi- 
vwvia bevrai. 

I I. ttjs o-vvvoprjs avTG> dvTinoi- 

ovpevovs] avTa is partly the 
ethical dative, and partly go- 
verned by ovv : " claiming to 
share AA r ith him the task of 
tending the herd." 

I 2. Kadapov povov] " Alone 

and clear." Cf. infr. 303 d, e, 
304 a. 






nOAITIK02. 



4J 



268. NE. 20. 'OpOorara p.ev ovv. 

SE. ToDro roivuv, co ^coKpares, rjfxtv ttou]T€ov, el 
/j.7] pLeAAoifieis eVl tcq reXet KaTaicrxyvou tov \6yov. 

NE. 20. 'AAAa pcr]v ov8apLu>9 tovto ye Spaareou. 

SE. ITaA^ to'lvvv e'tj a'AAr?? apx>J? &i ko.8' irepav 
68oi> Tropev6i]vat riva. 

NE. 20. rioiW 577 ; 

aE. ^ythov iraihiav eyKepaaapievovs' av^yw yap 

fxepei del fxeyaXov fivOov 7rpoa-)(p^craadai, kcu to 

Xolttov Srj, Kaddirep eV toI? TrpocrOev, fie'po? del fie'povs 

e dcpaipovpLtvovs eV axpov d(piKi>€io-6ou to {rjTovp.tvov. 

ovkovv XPV 5 

NE. 20. Haw fxev ovv. 



tins pur- 
po e wt 
mu.s!, bej in 
afresh 
travel by 
a different 
way 

ing our dis- 
5 cussion 
with an an- 
cient tale, 
before we 
resume our 



of 
divisions, 

and con- 
tinue them 
until we 
10 read) t he 
desired 
summit. 



2. (I (ir) fieWoifiev] " Un- 
less we were to — as we feared 
we should if we neglected this." 
The optative may be defended 
by supposing an attraction from 
the preceding optatives : the 
past tense being continued in 
thought. But it is equally pos- 
sible that this attraction (from 
Tvyxdvoifiev) may have influ- 
enced the scribes. Ast and 

Stallb. COirj. peWopev. 

5. i£ ciXXrjs dpx^s — nad* ere- 

pav 686p] " From a fresh start- 
ing-point, and by another road," 
i. e. approaching the subject 
from a different side. The 
myth which follows, like the 
digression in the Thepetetus, 
affords a rest after the thorny 
path which has been trodden, 
and also presents a deeper and 
more religious aspect of the 
question. Cf. Prot. 317c: 17 

avrr] pot apx*] eariv — ij^rep cipri. 

Arist. Eth. Nic. VII. 1, § 1 : 

aWrjv TTOirjcrapivov; dpxrp>. 

8, <TV\vto yap pepei 8ei peydXov 



pvBav npoo-xp.] " We must call 
in aid a large portion of a great 
cycle of mythology." The fables 
quoted are viewed as fragments 
of a larger whole, some part of 
which is narrated, and part of 
what is narrated is applied to 
the purpose of the dialogue. 
Cf. Legg. 4, 713 a : 5 Ap' ovv 
pv6a> crpiKpd y en 77poaxpf]o~Teou, 
ei peWopev eppe\a><: 7rcos 8t]Xa>- 
crat to vvv iparcopevov j 

10. pe'pos — {jjTovpevov] Com- 
pare Bacon, Nov. Org. II. 16 : 
" Turn vero post rejectionem 
et exclusivam debitis modis 
factam, secundo loco, tanquam 
in fundo, manebit — forma affir- 
mativa, solicla, et vera, et bene 
terminata." 

I I . en (inpov drpinvelrrdai. to £.] 

" To arrive at the object of our 
search, as it were to the sum- 
mit of a steep ascent." Cf. 

Rep. 7 j 5 I 5 e • &ia rpa^fi'ay rr/s 
di'afBdaecos ko.1 dvdvTovs. T;ie 
mountain-path (aTpanos) is kept 
with difficulty. 



42 



OAATONOS 



HE. 'AAAa 8r) tu> /ivdcp fjiov irdvv irpocreye rov p. 268 1'" 
vovv, KaOanep 01 7rat<5es" ttolvtias ov ttoXXo. eK(f)evy€i$ 
7raf5i«y errf. 

NE. 20. Aeyoi? av. 

j SE. 'H^ TOLVVV KCU €Tl t<TTO.l TWV irdXai \z\6eV- 

rcov ttoXXol re aAAa /cat £7) zeal to 7re/)t t^j/ 
'Arpecos re /cat ©ueoToi; Xe^Oetcrav epiv (pda-fxa. 
a/o;/coa? yap 7roi> /cat a7rofir)/ioi>€veis- 6 (paai yeve- 
adai Tore. 



1. 'AAAa 817 tu> pv8a> — KaGinrep 
oJ 7ra75es] Cf. Soph. 224 d : 
pvdov — iraiaiv as oiktiv fjplv. So 
the myth in the Phsedrus is said 
7rotSm TvenaLadai. Phsedr. 265 d. 

2. Tvavrcoa — er^] " You are 
not many years escaped from 
play." Cf. supr. d, iraibidv. Ste- 
phanus (anticipated Ly a few 
MSS.) raised a doubt about 
the accent, and read 7rai8las : 



864 d 



naiSi 



9, 004 CI : t) Traioia xP co l Jievos j 
oii8e 7TG) tu>v tolovtcov hiacpepav. 

He has been followed by some 
editors, who translate Traibias 
err/ " years of childhood." 
Stallbaum justly replies tbat 
" 3'ears of child's-play" would 
only be a more graceful way 
of saying the same thing. 
But he errs with the rest in 
joining Trai8ias with em, al- 
though he sees that with this 
rendering noKv is required 
instead of noWd. The present 
is only one of numberless in- 
stances of hyperbaton which 
occur in these dialogues. Cf. 
Soph. 235a: on tbi/ rrjs naidias 
perexovrmv itrri ris uepcov. The 

genitive in the MS. reading, 
7rai8ias t is, however, ambiguous, 
and I have ventured to intro- 



duce the plural natBid^, which 
exactly suits the context, and 
occurs several times in the 
Laws. Cf. Ar. Pol. VIII. 2 : 
Ata tovto Bel naidias eladyeo-dai 
Kciipocpv\nKovvTas rfjv XP1 <TLU } <*> s 
Trpoadyovras qbnppaKelas X^P tv ' 
avecris yap 77 toicivti) kIvt]<tis rrjs 
ijfVXVS) KaL $ la T h v ^ovyjv dvd- 

iravo-is. The word (in common 
with many others) has no ac- 
cent in the Bodleian MS. 

5. 'Hv tolvvv kciI en eorai] 
Cf. Thucyd. I. 22 : rav yevopevuv 
■ — kcu — peWovreov -rrore ctvdis ecr- 

fo-dai. " There really happened, 
and shall hereafter happen 
again, like many other things 
of which ancient tradition has 
preserved the record, the por- 
tent which appeared in con- 
nexion with the legendary 
sti'ife of Atreus with Thyestes." 
The word %», like " once upon 
a time," marks the beginning 
of a tale. (Phaadr. 237 a.) Cf. 
Tim. p. 2 2 C : TroWal ml Kara 
TToXXd <p0opai yeydvacnv kcu en 
ecrovTai. 

7. (pdcrua) "A sudden, un- 
expected sight." Soph. Track 

508 : rerpaopov cpdcrpa raupov. 
Cf. Theset. 155 a: ri nor eorl 
ravra ret cpdvpara ev rjp'iv. 



I10AITIK02. 



43 



268. NE. 212. To irepl tv) 1 ? xf JV(T V s ' &PVQS "was arj- 
\xC10v <fipa(JEis. 



1. arjfiflov] The form of 
the story to which Plato al- 
ludcs appears to be the same 
which is given in one of the 
scholia on Enrip. Or. 988 : 
" Hermes revenged the death 
of Myrtilus, his son, upon the 
Pelopidse, by causing a golden- 
fleeced lamb to be born amongst 
the flocks of Atreus. When 
his claim to the succession was 
disputed, Atreus promised to 
display the prodigy in proof 
that the gods favoured his 
right. Thyestes persuaded 
Aerope, the wife of Atreus, to 
give him the lamb : whence 
Atreus was in danger of losing 
the kingdom, had not Zeus, 
who upheld his claim, made 
the sun and the Pleiads to 
return from their setting to- 
wards their rising." It is clear 
from this in what sense the 
lamb is called a " sign" or 
" token" (a-rjuelov) : and how 
the greater portent was given 
by the god " in bearing witness 

to Atreus" {y.aprvpr]0-as 6 6ebs 

'Arpet). The notion that " the 
sun in horror turned his face 
from the scene" (also men- 
tioned in the Scholia to Eurip- 
ides, and frequently alluded to 
in the tragedies of Seneca : 
see also Hygin. Fab. 88, 258), 
although the most commonly 
received, appears to be one of 
several rationalizing interpre- 
tations of the fable. The lines 
of Euripides should be quoted 
here : — 

bdev 86poio~i rols e'/xois 
^Ad' apa noXiHTTovos 
MaidSos t6kov, 
to xpvaofxciWov upvus oiror 



iyiv€TO re'piis oXobu 6\o6v 

Xo^evfia iroipvLOKTiu 

'Arp/oy 'nnroftuTa' 
o6cv epis to Te TTTfpuiTOV 
aXlov p.(Ttfiakiv apfMu 
Titv jrpos urntpav Kt\ev6ov 
ovpavov pedappuo'ao'a 
povoiicoKov es ua>, 
€TTTim6pov Te Spoprjpa TL\(iu8os,' 
ety 68bv uX\av Zevs /xern/3uAAet. 

See also ejusd. El. 734, where 
the truth of the same legend 
is questioned. The " golden 
lamb" seems to have been 
known, with variations, to the 
author of the cyclic poem 
Alcmreonis and to Pherecydes 
(Schol. in Eur. loc. cit.), but 
it is difficult not to connect 
the other portent, as well as 
the revolution imagined by 
Plato, with the tale told to 
Herodotus by the Egyptian 
priests, " that in the course 
of the 11,340 years during 
which Egypt had been a 
monarchy, there had been 
no god in human shape ; but 
the sun had reversed his 
course four times, and that 
without any convulsions of na- 
ture in the land of Egypt. 
To which they added, that 
before the 11,340 years gods 
had ruled in Egypt, one of 
whom had been at each time 
supreme : of whom Orus, the 
son of Osiris, was the last." 
Hdt. II. cc, 142, 144. There 
is no ground, however, for sup- 
posing, as Boeckh (Philol. p, 
1 18) at one time imagined, that 
the Egyptians had anticipated 
(through the study of their 
own monuments) the scientific 
theory of the precession of 



G 2 



44 



IIAAT0NQ2 



HE. OuSa/im, dXXa to irepl tyj? peTaPoXrjs 8v- p. 
(jecoy re kgu di'aroXrj? rjXlov koll t(du aXXwv acrrpcov, 
cos dpa oOev p.ev dvareXXeL vvv, el? tovtov Tore tov 
tottov tSvero, dveTeXXe 8' €/c tov evavTLOv, Tore be 8i] 
i fiapTvp-qaas dpa 6 Oebs 'At pel fieTefiaXev avTO eiri to 
vvv o~yr\\ia. 

NE. 20. Aeyerai yap ovv brj koll tovto. 

HE. Kat fjLrjv av koll ty]v ye fiao-Cheiav rjv f)pf;€ 
Kpovo? 7roXXcov aKrjKoapev. 
> NE. 20. YlXelcrTcov lieu ovv. 

HE. Tt be ; to rot*? epnrpocrQev (pveaOaL yrjyevels b 
Kat /a?) €^ aAA^Aeoy yevvdaOaL ; 



2 6 9 | 



the equinoxes. The reason 
advanced by Plato himself may 
possibly have given rise to the 
fancy in the first instance. 
" All that is visible must suffer 
change." Compare Seneca, Ep. 
71. § 11 : "Quid enim ruuta- 
tionis periculo exceptum % Non 
terra, non ccelum, non totus 
hie rerum omnium contextus, 
quamvis Deo agente ducatur. 
Non semper tenebit hunc or- 
dinem, sed ilium ex hoc cursu 
aliquis dies dejiciet." 

(2.) <ppd&is\ " Your words 
import, perchance, the token 
which depended on the golden 
lamb." 

2. tS)V ciXXcov aarpcovj The 

Pleiades are mentioned in the 
story. 

3. coy apa — to vvv axr/pa] 

Plato here improves upon the 
original legend, in which the 
sun only changed his course 
for a single day. 

5. avr6~] The rising and set- 
ting of the sun and stars con- 
sidered as one phenomenon. 

8. Kat p.r)v av~] As in the 



Theastetus three different 
theories, so here three distinct 
fables are woven together. 

fjv rjpije Kpovos^ Familiar 
to the Greek mind from the 
poem of Hesiod, perhaps also 
from the Orphic hymns, and 
celebrated in the festival of the 
KpoW. The lines from the' Works 
and Days' seem to have been 
present to Plato's mind, 111- 
12 2: oi pev iici Kpovov rjcrav, or' 
ovpava ep.(3ao-i\eveV | coy Se deol 
£a>eo-Kov, aKrjBea Bvpbv fyovTes, | 
voacpiv cirep re ttovcov *cat ol£vos" 
ov8e ti 8eiX6v I yqpas eTTrjv, atei oe 
7rdSas Kat xelpas opoloi TepirovT 
iv QaKirjcri, kcikcov eKToadev dirdv- 
Tcof" I dvrjaKov S' as vnvco fiefitt/;- 
fievoi' eadXd Se Tvdvra | rolcriv etjV 
Kapnov 8' i'epepe £el8a>pos apovpa \ 
avTopdrrj noXXov re *cat a<pffovoV 
01 8' edeXrjpol | ^crv^oi epya vi- 
povro vvv io-ffkoiaiv noXeeaaiV | 
axiTap €7rei8r] tovto yevos Kara 
yaia KaXvfyev, to\ fiev 8aipove's 
ettri At6y peydXov 8id (3ov\as, | 
eadXol iiri)(66vioi, (pvXaKes 6vq- 
Tav dvBpmncov. 

1 1, tovs epTvpoadev (pveoScu yrj- 



riOAITIKOS. 



269. NE. 20. Keel tovto eu TU>U TTaXai XtyOtVTWV . 

HE. TaOra tolvvv tcrri pev ^vpiravTa Ik tqlvtov 
irdOovs, Kol irpbs tovtol? erepa fivpla koll tovtcou ert 
Oau/jLaarorepa, Scot 8e ^povov ttAtjOo? ra pev avrwv 
a.7rea(3r]K€, to. 8e bito-ira.pp.eva elprjTou x^P^ ^cacrra 
c got a.XXrjXcoi'. o 5' earl Tvacn tovtois airiov to ird- 
609, ovSeh eiprjKe, vvv 8e 8rj Ae/creW* ei? yap ttjv tov 
fiacriXeco? dirofteL^iv 7rpe\j/€L pi-jOev. 

NE. 20. KaAAicrr' etVe?, kol Xeye pLrjSev iXXel- 

7TC0U. 

HE. ' Akovol? av. to ydp irav ToSe tote p.ev avTOs 
6 6eos £vp.7ro8riyei 7ropw6p.evov kol avyKvKXel, tote 8" 



and, onoe 
more, how 

there were 
giants in 
1 ili I days, 
the off 
Bpring of 
the Earth. 



yevtls] " That the earlier race of 
men had their generation from 
Earth." Plato is fond of this no- 
tion, which, as usual, he colours 
variously with his own imagina- 
tion. Cf.Symp. 1 90 b, 1 9 1 c ; Rep. 
3,414; Soph. 248 c;Prot.320c; 
Tim. 23 e; Critias 109 c. The 
fable spoke simply of earth-born 
men. Plato finds in this a hint 
for his " Phoenician" tale of an 
earlier and more perfect mode 
of generation. He seems to 
blend together Hesiod's children 
of the earth and the army of 
Cadmus. See also Ar. Pol. I. 5 : 
row? 7rpd>Tovs, eire yrjyeve'is r/crav, 
eire in (pQopas Tivbs iaoodrjo-av. 

2. ek ravTov ira6ovi\ " These 
all arise out of one and the same 
occurrence" (viz. the reversal 
of the motion of the Cosmos). 

4. 81a be xpovov nXr/dos] Com- 
pare the way in which proba- 
bility is given to the myth of 
Atlantis in Tim. 2 1 d : 81a, 8e 

Xpovov Kai (pdopav tu>v ipyao-api- 
vav ov dirjpneae 8evpo 6 Xoyos. 

5. 8ie<nrapp.eva] As in the 

case of the three or four fables 



These scat- 
tered frag- 
ments of 
tradition 
arise from 
one and 
the same 
circum- 
10 stance. 
The uni- 
verse is at 
one time 
turned by 



to which allusion is made. 

6. to TraOos] The article is 
used because of tqvtov nddovs 
preceding. 

8. irpfyei pr^Biv] " The tell- 
ing will be finely suited to our 
object of displaying the nature 
of the king." 

11. to — irav robe] " This 

universe." As in Tim. 29 e : 

yevecriv kol to nau To8e. 

avros 6 8e6s] The mono- 
theism of this passage is more 
express than that of the Ti- 
meeus. (Cf. infr. 271 d.) Or 
the article may be accounted 
for by supposing the Timajus 
already written. 

12. gvp-nodriye 1 ] The WOl'd 

7roS?7-ya) (to guide) occurs only 
here and in Legg. 10, 899 a 
(of the spirit which determines 
the motion of the sun), gvp.- 

nobr/yel iropevopevov <a\ o-vyKV<\(l 

= " assists with his guidance as 
it moves and helps to roll the 
circling sphere." The universe 
has an independent principle 
of motion, which, however, 
during the better cycle, is di- 



46 



IIAATGN02 



(iotl, but 
at certain 
periods ie 
relinquish- 
ed by him, 
and turns 
itself in the 
opposite 
direction. 



For none 
but the 
mostDivine 

things are 
without 
change. 
But the 
universe, 
being vi- 
sible, is of 
a lower 



dfl]K€V, OTOLV a'l TTfploSot TOV 7TpO(Tr)KOPTOS a\JTW fJ.(- 

rpov e\Xr)(j)u>aLv r)8ij xpovov, to Se irakiv avTopurov 
6£9 ravavrla irepidyeTai, foois ov koll typovqcnv elXrj- 
\09 e/c tov o-vvappoaavTO? amo kot dpyas. tovto 8e 
5 avTW, to dvdiraXiv Uvoll, did to?) i$j dvdyKr]? tptyvTOV 
yeyovev. 

NE. 212. Aid. to irolov 8-q ; 

HE. To kclto. Tama kol coaavTois ^X iLV " 6 * KaL 
TavTov elvai toTs iravTcov OeioTaTOi? TrpocrrjKet povoi>>, 
io acopaTos 8e (})vo-ls ov TavTrj? ttjs Tafjecos. ov <5e ov- 
pavov Ka\ Koapov iwcovop-aKapev, iroXXwv pev K.a\ 
paKaplcov irapd tov yevvrjaavTO? peTelXrjfav, d\dp 
ovv 8rj K€koli>(oi>7]K€ ye kou crcopaTO?. oOev avTa> pe- 



p. 265 , 



rected and impelled by God. 
Cf. the interpretation of Hera- 
clitus by Mn. Gaz. (quoted by 
Lassalle, I. 124) : 'E^el KapaTos 
(ivtt) (rfj ijfvxf]} ru 8rjpLovpyS 
crvveneadai Kai avco peTa tov deov 
rdSe to irdv avpnepnroXew Kai in' 
eKelvov Terdxdai Kai apxecrBai, $ la 
tovto tjj tov rjpepelv imdvpiq Kai 
apXTJs eXnidi Kara (prjo-l rrjv ^'xh v 
(pepeo-Qai. 

i. avrjKev] The poetical aor- 
ist, used because a point of 
time is spoken of. Cf. Theset. 
150 C : paieveo-Bat. pe 6 6eos 
dvayKa£ei, yevvqv be dneKa\vo-ev. 

orav — xp° vov ] " When the 
number of revolutions which 
make up the time appointed 
for the world have now reached 
their consummation. " Note 
the hyperbaton of xP° vnv i an ^ 
compare the " number of the 
state" in Kep. 8, 546, esp. the 

Words orav nepiTponal eKacTTOis 
kvkXwv Trepiq K )opa<; tjvvdnTcoo-t. 

2. to 8e~\ Sc. to nav To8e. 

3. &ov t>v] This is added 



to explain avropaTov. Compare 
Tim. 30 b : vovv pev ev yj/vxf}, 
y i /v Xl v °^ * v ~<*>l J - aTl £vvicTTas to 
7rav £vveTfKTaLveT0 — ovtcqs ovv 
8rj — 8el Xeyeiv Tov8e tov Kocrpov 
£a>ov epy\rvxov evvovv re Tjj 11X77- 
6eiq 81a ttjv tov 6eov yeveo~8ai 
irpovoiav. 

Kai (ppovrjo-iv ] Cf. Soph. 248 e: 
pr]8e £jjv aiiTO pr]8e (ppoveiv ' 

10. oh — ru^ewy] "Is of a dif- 
ferent order." Cf. Phileb. 49 c: 

f] 8e do-0evT]s (ciyvoia) rjplv tt/v twv 
yeXoiav rjp'iv e'iXrjxe Ta^iv re Kai 
(pvaiv. 

ovpavbv Kai Koapov] Cf. Phaedr. 
245 e : ivavra re ovpavov rrao-dv 
re ye'veo-iv. 

12. Trapa tov yevvrjo-avTos] Cf. 
Tim. 37 C : 6 yevvrjo-as iraTTjp. 

drhp ovv — o-capaTos] In the 
Timseus also the body is the 
source of all imperfection, 86 b: 

to. 8e 7Tepl \j/vx^]V (vocrrjpaTa) 8ta 
cruipaTos e£iv T0id8e. 

13. Kai o-vpaTos] Cf. Tim. 
32 c: o-oopaToei8es 8e 8r] — Set to 
yevopevov eivai. 



nOAITIKOS. 



47 



269. rafioArjs d/jLolpcp yiyvtadai 8td iravrhs ol8vvoltov, Kara 
bvvajiLV ye {11)1/ o ti /mAiara ev rw aura) kutoc ravra 
fitau (f)opau KLveLTai' 810 rr\v <xvaKVK.Xr]crLV e\Ar)yev, o 
TL a/ALKpOTCLTr)!/ Tr}$ ^CLVTOV^ KU>r)(T€(0? 7rapdAAa£iv. 



grade. Y<-t 
it lias the 
least possi- 
ble change 
of motion, 
when the 
direction 
of its rota- 

auro 8e eavro crTpe(peii> aei crye8ov ov8evi 8vvoltov 5 tion ia re- 

\ / 9 / t / versed. 

ttXtjv tco T03V KLVovfievcov av ttolvtcov r)yovp.evcp. KL- Nowitcan- 



I. Kara bvvap.iv ye pijv — Kivei- 
rai] Compare Laws 7, 821 c, d, 
where it is said to be impious 
to attribute an inconstant mo- 
tion to the sun, moon, and 
planets. So in the Timseus 
(p. 37) Time is created in 
order to bring the creature 
as near as possible to the Eter- 
nal archetype. 

3 . 816 — rrapaXkagiv] Only 
the most Divine things can 
be always alike. The Uni- 
verse, having a body, must 
suffer change. It moves as 
nearly as possible always in the 
same way (but cannot attain 
perfectly even to this) : "Where- 
fore it hath allotted to it a 
reverse revolution, as the least 
possible alteration of its mo- 
tion." The reasoning would be 
more complete if for avrov we 
might read tciutoG. Of. Tim. 36 
d, 39b, C. avaKvKKrjatv = to avaira- 
\iv Uvat supr. This meaning is 
required by the context here 
and in Rep. 10, 617 b, eVara/cv- 

Kkovjxevov : Tim. 40 C, enavanv- 
KXrjaeis : lb. 37 a, dvaKVK\ovpevr] ; 

in all which places a retrograde 
motion is in question. The force 
of the preposition seems to have 
been lost in the use of the word 
by later writers. A homely il- 
lustration of Plato's meaning 
may be taken from the game 
of cup and ball : in which, in 
order to ensure a steady mo- 



tion, the ball is spun from 
right to left, and the player 
waits until it has begun to re- 
volve in the opposite direc- 
tion. The resilience of the 
string, which is the cause of 
this, would correspond to the 
blind impulse (gvpepwos eVi- 
Bvpla) which makes the uni- 
verse rebound. 

6. TOiu Kivovpevcov av iravTMV 
ijyovfievf ] The language of 
Plato respecting the relation 
of the individual to the uni- 
versal soul is not consistent. 
In the Tima^us the former is 
a " particle" taken from the 
latter. In the Republic and 
Phsedrus, and less clearly in 
the Phsedo, the individual per- 
sonality of each soul is re- 
cognized. Yet in the passage 
of the Phsedrus there are some 
expressions in which the na- 
ture of the soul is generalized. 
Cf. also Legg. 10, 894 c : ra>v 

8t) 8eKa paXicrra rjplv KivrjO-eav 
t'iv av TrpoKpivaipev opdorara 
naacov eppcopeveo-TaTrjv re eivai 
na\ npaKTtKTjv biacpepovrois ; Mv- 
p'ua avdyicq nov Siacpepeiv ttjv 
avn)v avTTjv bwapevr/v Kivelv. lb. 
12, 966 e: 6 irep\ ttjv \}/v)(f]u 
ekeyopev, coy TrpeafivTarov re Ka\ 
deioTarov ecrrt iravroiv gov kivtjctis 
yeveaiv irapakafiovcra. aevaov ov- 
aiav enopLO-ev. 

av implies a contrast be- 
tween the divinest of all things 



48 



nAAT0NQ2 



ooj ill. . -. e 
itself al- 
ways : for 

that is the 

pi i\ Liege 
of mind. 

Nor can 
mind ori. 
ginate 

opposite 
move- 
ments. 
Hence the 
universe is 
not always 



veiv 8e tovtco rare yueV aAAcos", avQis Be ii/aurlco? ov p 
Oe'pi?. e/c TrduTOiV 8r] tovtgl>i> top Kocrpov prjTe abrov 
\pi] (fyavai aTpe(j)(ii> eavrov del, fxr/T av 6\ov del viro 
Oeov arpec^eaOai Slttol^ koL ivavrias irepiayoiyds, prjr 
sav Suo rive Oeco (j)povovi>T€ eavrol? ivavrla or ptfaiv p 
olvtov, dkX, 07T€p dpn lppi-]6r) kol povov Xonrov, tote 
pev vir dXXrjS tTvpiroSrjyeio-Oai Oela? airla?, to {tjv 
irdXtv e7TLKT(£>pevov koll XapfidvovTa dOavaariav iin- 



and the leader of all that is 
in motion. As the former 
alone can remain always the 
same, so the latter alone can 
revolve spontaneously for ever. 
The phraseology recals 
Phsedr. 245 c, where there is 
a similar appearance of demon- 
stration. See esp. the words 

ak\a kcll toIs aAAotj oaa Kivelrai 
tovto Trrjyrj Kai apxi Kivrjcreco^. 

A comparison of the above 
passages leaves little doubt that 
by the Leader of Motion 
here is meant Pure Soul in 
general, of which the Deity, 
who sustains the universe, is 
a particular example. The 
doctrine of the multiplicity 
of independent souls (Rep. 10, 
611 a) is here left out of view. 
The argument may be thus 
stated. All that is bodily 
must suffer change. The Uni- 
verse suffers the least possible 
change (or " diverges least from 
the motion of the same") in 
revolving on an axis in one 
plane opposite ways alter- 
nately. But the Universe can- 
not always be the cause of its 
own motion : only Pure Soul 
moves spontaneously for ever. 
Nor can Soul be the cause of 
diverse and opposite motions. 
Hence the mighty fabric is not 



self-moved always, nor always 
moved by God : nor by two 
Gods alternately, for, as before 
stated, spirit cannot be op- 
posed to spirit. There re- 
mains only the case which has 
been given. 

7. to (r\v "nakiv e7riKTa>fifvov] 
" Receiving a new influx of 
life." 

8. \afjLJ3dvovTa ddavaaiav iiri- 
o-K(vao-TX]v ] The world re- 
news her immortality, which 
she receives afresh from her 
Creator's hand. imo-Kevao-T^v 

= repaired, refitted. The 
word is omitted in Ast's Lexi- 
con (edition of 1835). Of. 
Legg. 5, 738 b: ovt av Kaivrjv 
e'| dpxijs T '£ irotfj ovt av TraXaiav 
8i€(p6apptvrjv emo~Kevd£rjTai (jro- 

Xti/). The World grown old, 
like Milton's hermit-soul, now 
" Prunes her feathers and lets go 
her wings," 

which, in following her own 
blind will, 

" Were all-to ruffled and some- 
times impaired." 

ddavaaiav] Not merely ex- 
emption from death, but good- 
ness, the one immortal thing. 
Cf. Legg. 4, 7 J 3 e: ° <T0V * v 
rjplv ddavaaias eveo~Ti, tovtu nei- 
dopevovs. 

ddavaatav — napa tov fypi- 



riOAITIKOS. 



49 



70. o-KevacTTrju irapa tov Syfiiovpyov, TOTr7F^ihm*~x/a>€0r}, Batt-moredj 

*> « v » v ,/ v v >, /)/ ^^^ uor moved 

Ot eavrov avrov tei/at, Kara Kaipov acpet/evTa tolovtov opposite 

&>crre avaTraXtv iropeveaOau 7ro\\as irepi6bu>v pivpi- either i>y 

/« is > v / * v , / » v one Deity 

aoay ow to \xeyunov ov kcll i(roppo7rcoTaToi> dirt or more 

/ ~ «,% 5 / than one, 

apLLKpOTOLTOV pOUVOV 7TOOOS £€J>OU. 5 for mind 



ovpyov] Here, as in Tim. 41a, 
the universe is entirely de- 
pendent upon the Creator for 
immortality. The word 89/u- 
ovpyos in Plato is equivalent to 
6 ^vvi(TTas, 6 £vvappoo-as, 6 yev- 
vT]a-as, and has only the faintest 
trace of the mystic solemnity 
with which it was afterwards 
invested. 

2. fit' eavrov] Eusebius has 
eavrov, and the reading of the 
Bodleian (with An), fit' eavrov 
eavrov (sic Bodl.), perhaps indi- 
cates some confusion. But St' 
eavrov, signifying that the world 
at such a time is the ultimate 
cause of his own motion, is not 
certainly wrong. Cf. Legg. 10, 
903 e : peraj3dX\ei — fit' eavrijv rj 
St' erepav -^rvx^v. 

Kara icaipbv d<fiedevra roiov- 

rov] " Being let go at such a 
favourable moment." It is 
true that supposing the mo- 
tion equable, every moment 
would be, mechanically speak- 
ing, alike. But then other 
causes, besides those merely 
mechanical, are imagined. The 
av^cpvroi iiviOvpia is not a me- 
chanical cause. Compare the 
"opposite powers" of motion 
attributed in the Timseus (38 d) 
to the circle of Mercury and 
Venus and that of the Sun. 
Two conditions, then, contri- 
bute to make possible the 
length of the succeeding period 
— the state of the innate im- 
pulse at the time at which the 



" engine is reversed," and the 
shape and position of the 
whole mass. The redundant 
form of the sentence in which 
both these conditions are ex- 
pressed is characteristic of the 
later manner of Plato. Stall- 
baum has not chosen to ex- 
plain his objection to this way 
of taking the words. 

3. 7roAAas nepiodav pvpid8as] 
" Many times ten thousand re- 
volutions," i. e. days, since the 
diurnal revolution is the one 
most naturally attributed to 
the whole Heaven. Cf. Theaat. 

153 C : ems pev av rj neptyopci 
f) Kivovpevr] Kal 6 fjXios. Tim. 
39 C : vvf- pev ovv fjpepa re ye- 
yovev — t] rr)s puis /cat <ppuvipa>- 
rdrrjs KVKKrjaecos TrepioSos. 

4. lo-oppoTTOirarov] Because it 
is the most perfect sphere. 

era arpiKpordrov fialvov 710- 

80s] Moving on the smallest 
pivot — in fact, a mathemati- 
cal point — in modern lan- 
guage, the celestial south pole. 
Like the Indian tortoise, the 
Univei-se has no surface on 
which to rest. The image of 
the top, used for another pur- 
pose in Rep. 4, 436 d (orav ev 
ra airy irrj^avres to Kevrpov 
7repL(pepcDVTat), has probably sug- 
gested this expression. The Uni- 
verse is like a great humming- 
top when " sleeping." Cf. 

Legg. IO, 893 d: /cat Tore pev 
eo-riv ore j3ao-ii/ evos KeKrrjpeva 
TLvbs Kevrpov. 



II 



50 



riAATON()2 



cannot lie 

opposed tu 

mind. But, 
which 

alone re- 
mains, it is 
at one time 
guided l>\ 
its Divine 
Author, 
and re- 
ceives from 
him a re- 
newal of 
life and im- 
mortality. 
And again, 
being let 
go at the 
most au- 
spicious 
moment, 
it makes 
countless 
revolutions 



NE. 20. tbaiverai y ovv 5?) kcu pa\a etKorco? p- 27a 
€ipi]ir0at ttuvO' oaa 8l€\i]Xv0u9. 

SE. AoyiadpevoL 8r) ^vvvor)cra>pev to 7ra0o? e/c 
tcov vvv XeyOevTOiv, o tv<jlvtu>v e'(.jjap€v elvat tcov Oav- 
5 paaTcov aiTiov. eari yap ovv 8rj tovt clvto. 

NE. 20. To ttoiov; 

SE. To rr)v rov ttolvtos (j)opav totI p.tv €(/)' a vvv 
KVKXelrai (pepeaOcu, Tore <5' eiri tuvuvtm. 

NE. 20. Ilw? 8r) ; 
[ ° HE. TavTi]v Trjv p.era(3o\r)v ■qyeiaOcu Set tcov irc-pi 
rov ovpavov yiyvopevcov Tpoircov waacov elvai pe- c 
yiarrjv kcu TeXecoTUTt^v rpowr\v. 

NE. 20. "Eolk€ yovv. 



1 . /xaXa eifcdrwy] The Stranger 
has indeed spoken with an ap- 
pearance of artless simplicity 
well ' calculated to impose on 
the imagination of youth. 

3. Aoyiadpevot. 8ij] " Let US, 

reasoning on what has now 
been said, try to comprehend, 
in all its bearings, the fact 
which we described as the 
cause of all the phenomena 
that have excited our wonder." 

7. (popciv — (pepecrdai] Cf. 
Theset. 153 d : rj nepicpopa rj 
Kivovpevrj. Legg. 10, 906 b : al 
— (prjpai (pacTLV. 

9. Has 817 ;] Badh. " Haec 
omnia adeo lucid a explicata 
sunt, ut mireris cur Socrates 
etiamnum hsereat, et per ilia 
7rwj Si) respondeat. Neque 
vero Hospes dubitantem do- 
cere dignatur, sed ulterius 
pergit." One point, however, 
was not made clear, namely, 
how the change of the direc- 
tion of revolution was the 
cause of the other two tradi- 



tions : and it is this which the 
Stranger (though beginning av- 
codev iroOev un dpxrjs) proceeds 

to explain. 

IO. t5>v 7rep\ rov ovpavov ytyVO- 
peVCOV Tp07TO>v] Tile TpOTTT) Tj\iOV, 

or solstice, is the change in 
the apparent motion of the 
sun's place on the horizon at 
rising and setting. Horn. Od. 
O, 404 ; Plat. Legg. 12, 945 d. 
The word rpoivr, is here gene- 
ralized and extended so as to 
include every cardinal change 
in the celestial motions : in 
the same lofty spirit in which 
the Great Year (reXeos eviavros) 
is spoken of in the Timseus, 
or as we speak of the year of 
Saturn or Uranus. The word 
seems to be used in the same 
general sense in Tim. 39 d : 

tcov ao~Tp(ov oo~a 81 ovpavov no- 
pc-vopeva eV^e rpoivas. Compare 

also Ar. de Ccelo II. 14, §1, 
who says that if the Earth has 
a double motion there must be 
rpoTta\ also of the fixed stars. 



riOAITIKOS. 



51 



270. BE. MeylcTTa? roivvv kcll /j.€Ta(3oAas xprj vo/jli(Jelv 
yiyvecrOcLL rore tols ivrh? yjlilv oXkovctlv clvtov. 

NE. 20. Kai TOUT €LK09. 

37 E. MeTafioXa? Se fxeydXas kcll iroXXd? kcll ttclv- 
tolcls avfx<pepofX€va9 dp ovk lo-/jl€v rrjv tcov (ochov 5 
(fyvcnv otl xaXeirws dpe^erai ; 
d NE. 20. n«y 6° ov; 

37E. <$>0opcu roivvv i£ dvdyK7]9 rore fieyiorou 
£jv{a/3cllvovcti rwv re dXXcov (cocov, Kai 8r) kcll to tcov 
avOpcoiroov yivos oXiyov rt TrepiXelireTai. 7rep\ Se tov-io 
tovs aXXa re TradrjfxaTa iroXXa kcll 6av\iao~Ta kcll 
Kawd ijvfi7ri7fT€i, fie'yLcrTOv be rode kcll <~vveTto\ievov 
rfj rod iravTos dveiXlljei, rore OTav r) tt}? vvv Ka6e- 
(TTr)KVLas ivavTLCL yiyvr)TCLL Tpoirr). 

NE. 20. To iTOLov : 15 



by itself, 
like .-i huge 
and per- 
Eectlj -ba- 
lanced top, 
revolving 
on the 
fill- -t \M-ji. 
This 

change is, 
as it were, 
the solstice 
of the great 
year. And 
this crown- 
ing change 
involves 
many lesser 
changes, 
destructive 
to the 
animal 
economy. 
Hence 
many crea- 
tures per- 
ish, and of 
mankind 
also but 



2. rots euros rjfiiv oIkoxxtlv 
aired] This is one of the in- 
versions or alternations of 
words with which these dia- 
logues abound. 

5. (rvp<pepope'vas] " Coming 

on together," as in hostile 
array. Cf. Theeet. 152 e : vvp- 
(pepe<rda>v. lb. 153 a: rocrovrov 
a-rpaTonehov. " When sorrows 
come, they come not single 
spies, but in battalions." 

g. rav re aXXcov Trepihe'i- 

Trerai] The sentence returns 
to the indicative mood al- 
though redundant, because the 
last clause contains the prin- 
cipal statement. Cf. Thuc. 

"VI. 32 : i\ex6rj(rav roioi'Se Xoyoi 

riVo re aXXcov Kai 'EppoKpdrqs 

6 "Eppcovos — eXeye roidde. 

IO. TOVTOVs\ SC TOVS TCOV CLV- 

flpdmwv nepiXeLTTopevovs. yevos 
om. pr. n. 



11. aXXd T£ Tvad^para — piyi- 
(ttov 8e ro'Se] Cf. Tim. 20 a : 
Tipaios re Kptriav Se — , alib. 

12. gvpninTei] "Coincide." 
The meaning of £w is promi- 
nent, as in £vp(pepopevovs. 

gwerropevov] Following the 
analogy of the world's un- 
twisting. Consentaneous with 
the rebound and reverse mo- 
tion of the Great Whole. 

13. orav fj rrjs vvv rponrj] 

r?7S vvv nadeaTTjKvias, SC. TpoTrrjs, 
which, like the plural rpoTrals 
below, 271 c, signifies not only 
the " turn," but the cycle of 
movement which follows. The 
double meaning of the English 
word "revolution" nearly cor- 
responds to this ambiguity of 
rpoTTTj. " When there occurs 
the transition to the cycle 
opposite to that in which we 
live." 



H 2 



nAATQNOS 



SE. ''Hi/ rjAiKiav €KacTTOV eiye rwv £coa)v, avrrj p. 270 
TTpcorov pclv eon) 7rdvTcou, Koi iiravcraro TTOLV 0(JOV rjv 
Ovr/Tov iiri to yepainpov ISfiv iropevopievov, /uera/3aA- 
Xov 8e 7ra\i.v irrl tovvolvtLov olov veoWepov kou anra- e 



few are 
left. And 
on these 
few there 

passes a 

mighty 

elian-e. 

As the 

movement 5 X(OTep0V €(t)V€TO. KOLl TtOV fJL6V TTptafivTepOdV CCl AeVKCU 

of the , , , m / , v 

world, so rpt)(€9 e/xeXaLUOUTO, tcov o av yeveuovrcov ai irapdiai 



i. T]\iKinv] " Condition, or 
appearance, in respect of youth 
or age." Cf. Euthyd. 271 b: 

pd\a ttoXv eViSeScoKeVai poi 

e'8o£e Kai — ov ttoXv tl ti]v t\K\.k\.o.v 
duicptpeiv KpiroftovXov. This use 
of the word affords a point of 
transition to the meaning of 
" size" or " stature." Cf. Hdt. 
III. 16, IV. in. 

2. eTravaaro — 77opevopevov ] 

"All that is mortal ceases at 
such a time to advance towards 
a more ancient look." to yepal- 
Tepov Ibelv, " that which is more 
aged to look upon." Cf. Phsedr. 
253 d : XevKos I8e7v. Tim. 52 d : 

7ravToba7rrjV ISeiv. Soph. CEd. 

Col. 327 : Svcrpop' opav. 

4. olov vearepov] " Younger 
to all appearance." 

Badham conj. I6v, which is 
free from objection. But olov 
vearepov exactly expresses 
" younger in appearance, 
though not in years." and 

corresponds with yepalrepov 

I8eiv supr. The instance of 
olov with an adj., given by 

Passow, ai olov o-we^els klvtj- 

o-eis, is from a late authority 
(Schol. Ap. Kh. 3, 1 01 8). But 
the use is so closely analogous 
to other uses as hardly to 
need defence. Cf. infr. 277 c: 

ttjv — olov roll <papp.a.KOis Kai 177 
avyKpao-ei tcqv xP a H-^ TC0V evap- 
yeiav. 

5. ecfaveTo] He proceeds as 



if he were nai*rating what hap- 
pened on one of these occasions 
in former time — say at the be- 
ginning of the cycle preceding 
ours. Cf. elx* supr. d. 

6. yeveitoVTcov] The form 
yeveidco is less distinctly incep- 
tive than yeveido-Kco, which oc- 
curs Synip. 181 d. "The 
cheeks of bearded men grew 
smooth, and restored each man 
to his former bloom ; and the 
youth's ' crescent nature' grow- 
ing smooth, and dwindling day 
by day and night by night, 
returned, both in mind and 
body, to the character and 
likeness of infancy, and then 
began to vanish away, and 
presently was no more seen." 
This process, which in any 
case seems to have been rapid, 
only occupied a few days 
where life had been sud- 
denly and violently extin- 
guished. These cases seem to 
be thought different from 
those of natural death : pro- 
bably because, in the latter, 
dissolution was imagined, as 
it had been more gradual, to 
be more complete ; so that 
earth could at once be mixed 
with kindred earth. That 
Plato is fully aware of the lu- 
dicrous aspect of all this will be 
obvious to any one who com- 
pares the speech of Aristophanes 
in the Sympos., 190-193. The 



I10AITIK02. 



53 



270. Xea.ivop.evai waXiv eiri ttjv irapeXOovoav copav e/ca- 
cttov KaOlaTaaav, tlov 8e tj(3covto>v to. aco/xara Xeai- 
vopceva kcu crpiKpOTepa kolO* rjpiepav kcll vvktol £k- 
aarrjv yiyvop,eva iraAiv eh ttjv tov veoyevovs 7rai8os 
(f)vaiv a7rrjei, Kara re ttjv ^j/v)(7]v /cat Kara to aco/ia, 
d<pop.oiovpeva' to 8 evTevOev fj8r) p.apaivopeva ko- 
p.t8fj to -irdpnrav e^rjfyavlteTO. tcov 8' av fiialcos- 
TeXevTCovTcov ev tco TOTe \povco to tov veKpov [crco/xa], 
Tama Tama Trdcrypv iraOrjpaTa 8id Taypvs, d8rjXov ev 

27 *• oXiyais rjfiepai? 8ie(p0eipeTO. 

NE. 20. Tevecris 8e 8rj t'is tot tjv, w tje've, (jcocov ; 
kol TLva Tpoirov etj dXXrjXcov eyevvcovTO ; 

SE. ArjXov, (h Sco/cpares', otl to pev i£ aXXr/Xcov 
ovk rjv ev tjj TOTe (f)vaei yevva>p.evov, to 8e 8r/ yrjye- 
ves rival 7tot€ yevos \e%Oev, tovt rjv to kolt eiceivov 



4>6opa, which follows the great 
rponx], has now been described, 
and we are next informed as 
to the mode in which the 
Earth replenishes herself. The 
existing generation being thus 
" compounded with dust," the 
Earth, which had previously 
lain fallow, began to produce 
her crop of heroes. 

6. d(popowvpeva ] Badham 
ingeniously conjectures cnro- 
pewupeva. But the ellipse is 
easily borne. 

7. rav Te\evr<DVT(OP — to tov 
veKpov [o-wjua]] For the redun- 
dant genitive with the change 
of number, cf. Phsedo 62 a: 

oiSe 7T0Te Tvy^dvei tb av6pama> 

— eo-Tip ore Kal ols, where much 
needless difficulty has arisen. 
The notion of the backward 
current being communicated 
to the process of animal life 
illustrates the ancient concep- 



tion of motion as including 
change, o-apa ova. Bodl. An. 

13. to e'£ aX\r)\oov — yevvu>- 

pevov] Sc. yivos, or perhaps, 
as sometimes happens, the ac- 
tion of the verb is made the 
subject of the passive voice. 
For this, cf. Soph. 221 a : to 
— avao-ncopevov. In that case 
the concrete is put for the ab- 
stract to yevvapevov for to 

yevvao~8cu. 

14. ev TJj Tore cpvaei] "Had 
no place in the course of na- 
ture which then obtained." 
For a similar use of <pvais, cf. 
Phsedo 103 b : to eV 777 cpvo-ei. 

to — yrjyeves aval iroTe yevos 
Xexdev] "The earth-born race, 
of whose former existence we 
have heard." 

15. tovt rjv] " Was this, was 
that which we have just hinted 
at and ai*e now to describe." I.e. 
to iv tt) tot€ (pvaei yevvmpevov. 



the order 
of the age* 
of man, is 
reversed. 

And, at 
the time 
when the 
world re- 
turns under 
the Divine 
care, old 
age is done 
away, and 
men pass 
through 
maturity 
and youth 
to child- 
hood and 
infancy, 
and so pass 
away. 
And in 
harmony 
with the 
same move- 
ment, the 
bodies of 
those who 



54 



ITAATONOS 



! < ■ ] > t in 
earth arise 

again. 
This was 
bhe giant 

brood, of 
whose last 
relics the 



tov %povov e/c -}/?;? naAiv dvaar pecjjo/xevov -, d.7r€/J.vr)~ p. 271 
/J.OV6V6T0 <5e v7ro tcov rjfxerepcov irpoyovcov tcov 7rptoTcov, 
01 TtAevroocrr) /xtv rfj irpoTepa irepKpopa tov e'£?;r 
Xpovov iyeiTovovv, rrjcrSe <5e /car' apyas e((jvovTO' b 
STovtcdv yap ovtol KtjpvKe? iyevovO' t-jfuv tcov Xoycov, 

OL VVV V7TO TToXXwV OVK 6p0LO9 ClTTLCTTOVVTaL. TO yap 

evTevOev, oipai, ^pj) ^vvvoelv. eyppitvov yap Icttl too 
tov? TrpeafivTas eiri ttjv tov TraiSb? ievai (pvcriv, 4k 
tcov T€T€\€VTr)KOT0i)i> av, Kei/uevcov 8e iv yrj, iraXiv 



I. (K yi]s ttuKiv avaarp€(j:ope- 
vov] The bodies which Earth 
has absorbed she gives foi'th 
again to be the habitations of 
other souls. It appears cer- 
tain from infr. 273 (however 
strange the conception) that 
the yrjyevels are born like the 
army of Cadmus, in full matu- 
rity, and then follow the stages 
which are here described : 
first attaining to eai'ly man- 
hood, then to youthful prime, 
and then to childhood, and so 
disappearing from the Earth : 
old age being literally un- 
known, as in the description 
of Hesiod. 

3. nepicpopa] . Not " period" 
but " revolution" = the time 
during which the Universe 
revolved in the former way. 
Cf. supr. a, tt] rare cpiia-ei : infr. 
274 e, tov £k tyjs vvv wepicpopus 
Ka\ yevecrecos /3ao~i\ea. 

4. eyeirovovv] " Were neigh- 
bours to" — i.e. next in point of 
time. Our first ancestors lived 
in the times immediately suc- 
ceeding the end of the former 

motion. en i/ecoo-ri tov Ai6j ttjv 
apxrjv exovros, Gorg. 5 2 3 b. 

5. tovtcov yap ovtoi KrjpvKes — 

tcov \6yav] Compare the care 



which is taken, in Tim. 22, 23, 
to account for the preservation 
in Egypt of the legend of 
Atlantis, and the disappear- 
ance of the same in Greece. 

6. vtto TvoWav — airto-rovvTcii] 

Cf. Plnedr. 229 c: o-v tovto ird- 
6ei to p,vdo\6yrjfia dXrjdes eivai ' } 

K.T.\. 

to yap — avvvoelv ] " For 
we must seek to comprehend, 
methinks, that which follows 
what has now been said." 

7. exop-fvov yap iaTi tw] The 

dative after ixopevov is curious, 
but exopevov eon is not quite 
the same as ex erai 5 an d the 
change of tg> into tov (if a 
change were required) would 
be easier and also better than 
Stallbaum's conjecture of eiro- 
p,evov for ex°l XfV0V - " Eor it is 
of a piece with (hangs together 
with) the aged men's returning 
to the nature of infancy that 
from the dead also," &c. 

8. e'*c tu>v TeTekevTTjKOTav — 

(pvopevovs] The irregularity of 
the construction is caused by a 
feeling that the dead persons 
are not the same with those who 
rise. This does not, howevei", 
prevent the sentence from con- 
tinuing as if tovs TerfXevT- 



nOAITIKOS. 



55 



271. e\el ^vvKTTaixevovs kcll dva(Biodo-K.oiievovs,\*} rfj Tp07nj 

crvvavaKVKXovnevi-is els ravavrla ti^s yeveaecos, kou 

y-qyevels Srj Kara tovtov tov Xoyov e£ dvdyio]? (fjvo- 

c fievovs, ovtcos e\euv Tovvofia kou tov Xoyov, ocrovs fii] 

debs avTciov els aXXrjv fiolpav eKo/juaev. 



A few, in* 
deed, were 
exempted 
by Divine 
ordinance 



t]Koras were the subject. Cf. 
Thetet. 182 b : d\\' e'£ dp(po- 

Tepcov npbs aXXrjXa avyyiyvopevcov 
ras alcrdrjcreis Kal tci alcrdrjTa diro- 

TLKTOVTO. TO. [J.€V TVClld ClTTa yiyV€- 

crdai, ra be alcrOavopeva where 

see note. So that the yrjyeve Is are 
composed of the elements 
which have been restored to 
Earth from the life of the for- 
mer cycle. The Word yqyevels 

is a " tertiary predicate." 
" Being born by generation 
from the Earth." 

1. dva(3tcjo-Koiievovs] " Com- 
ing to life again." This, as 
afterwards appears, is the 
quickening of a soul which 
has been "sown" into the 
earth, infr. 272 e. 

enecrdai, which is commonly 
inserted before rjj Tponr), is 
omitted in Bodl. A IT. The word 
is unnecessary, and is very likely 
to have been added, from con- 
jecture, by some one who 
thought the apodosis too long 
deferred. 

2. avvavaKVKKovpevrjs] Stall- 

baum, following a hint of 
Schleiermacher, writes o-vvava- 
KVKXovpevovs, which he finds in 
one MS. (Zittav). But this only 
increases the obscurity, for the 
phrase els TavavTia ttjs yeveaecos 
is hardly intelligible. Teveo-is 
is here used in the widest and 
most abstract sense for the 
general process of Nature, the 
current of which is reversed 
with the motion of the Sphere 



(rfj rpoiTji = the change of mo- 
tion), whence the old gi - ow 
young, and the buried rise 
from earth again : diminution 
taking the place of growth, 
and generation of decay. See, 
for a parallel notion in mo- 
dern poetry, " The thoughts 
of men are widened with the 
process of the Suns j" and cf. 
infr. 273 c: ttjv em ttjv vvv yeve- 
trcv 686v. 274 c: rrjs vvv irepi- 
(popds Kal yeveaecos. Also Pha^dl*. 
245 e : Ttdvra re ovpavbv Trdcrav 

re yeveatv. See also Tim. 82 c: 

Srav dvdiraXiv rj yevecris tovtcov tto- 
pevrjrai, Tore ravra 8ia<p6eipeTai. 

Badham, rejecting eneo-6ai, 
COUJ. rpteiv for eKel. But cf. Prot. 
320 d : tvttovctlv avTa (sc. ra 
6vr)Ta yevrj} 6eo\ y^S evWov eK yr/s 
Kal nvpbs p-l^avres k.t.A. 

4. rovvopa Kal tov Xdyoi'] Sc. 
tov yrjyevels (pveadai. For e^eiv, 
cf. Thucyd. I. 9 : rr/v encovvpiav 
— o-^e'iv. 

oo-ovs pr] — inopicrev] Who 
they were that were thus ex- 
empted from the cycle of na- 
ture may be gathered from 
Plnedo 82 c : els $e ye 8eu>v 
yivos prj cpiXoaocp^o-avTi. Kal irav- 
TeXcos KaOapco ojtiovti ov Bepis 
dcpLKvelcrdat. tlXX' r] tco (piKopadel. 

Cf. Pha?dr. 249 a, 

5. avrcov] I. e. of those 
who should have been born. 
The elements which should 
have been united with the soul 
are identified in the language 
with the soul herself. 



mg 



thus bo 

again. 

5 There can 



;6 



nAATONOS 



expression, as m pecrai vvktss. 

IO. avTijs KVKkrjcreais] "For 

first the whole revolution was 
itself guided by the Divine 
care." avrrjs gives emphasis to 

KVKkrjcrecoi as Opposed to ra £cba. 

I. e. The universal movement 
which involves all else. 

ii. enifie\ovfj.evoi] It is per- 
haps implied that he acts only 
through the inferior deities. 

12. Tws vvvf — dieikrjppeva^ 
The general meaning of this ap- 
pears from infr. 272 e : ol Kara 

TOVS TOTTOVS ovvapxovTcs TCp pe- 



y/oT<» halpovi 6eul. But the 
exact construction is not ob- 
vious. Stallbaum proposes to 
read 00s 8e vvv — tsovt tjv — Stft- 
X-qnneva. The words as they 
stand, however, will afford the 
same sense without any tor- 
ture, by supposing peprj to be, 
like tou Kokocpava in Theaet. 
153 c, or 8vo pept) infr. 283 c, a 
cognate accusative in apposi- 
tion, expressing the mode of 
the action of ?ipx^. " The 
parts of the universe every 
way being divided under the 
rule of deities, just as is now 
the case in certain parts." (w9 

vvv Kara ronovs ravrov tovto SC. 

yiyverai.) This last idea, though 
hardly consistent with the gene- 
ral spirit of the myth, receives 
some illustration from Legg. 5, 
747 e, where the superiority of 
the inhabitants of particular re- 
gions is attributed to a Divine 
influence : as of? 6eia tis enl- 
ttvoui <a\ daipovoov Xrj^eis eiev. 

Compare Milton, Comus, 18-29. 
Phsedo 1 1 1 c : ko.1 S17 6ewv ?8t) 
— ev vis rcS ovti oIktjtcis 6eovs 



NE. 20. KofJLiSrj /xeu ovv tovto ye hzeTai Toh p. 37 ]| 
epirpoaOev. d\Xd 8y tou (3lov ov hri ttj? Kpovov 
(J)yj? elvai 8vvdp.ecos, iTOTepov ev exeivais rjv tou? Tpo- 
ttous rj ev TGucrSe ; ttjv pev yap tcov dcrTpcov re kou 

5 i)Xlov peTaftoXrjv SrjXov a>? ev eKarepacs ^ypmliTTet 
tolls Tpoirals yiyveaOat. 

SE. KaAwy tco Xoyto ^vpTraprjKoXovOrjKas . o <$' 
rjpov irep\ tou iravTa avTopaTa ylyveadat T0I9 dv- 
OpcoiroLs, i]KiaTa Tr)$ vvv earl Ka@ecrT7]Kvia? (fiopas, 

toaAA' tjv teal tovto tt}$ epjrpoaOev. tote yap avTrjs 
irpcoTOV 77/9 KVKXrjo-eco? r)p\ ev e7rip.e\ov/i€v09 0A779 6 

0609, '[COS" VVwf KaTOL T07T0VS TaVTOV TOVTO, VTTO 06COV 

2. ak\a §r] tov fiiov] The 

fable of the yrjyevels has been 
applied : the application of 
the story of Atreus is evi- 
dent : it only now remains to 
find a place for the legend of 
the golden age : when mpnov 

((peps £e[8wpos apovpa avTopciTT], 

In that former cycle the spon- 
taneous productiveness of the 
Earth was as apparent in the 
vegetable as in the animal 
kingdom. 

3. rais Tponals] The plural 
marks the concrete form of 



nOAITIKOS. 



57 



271. dpypvToav ttclvty) tcl tov koct/jlov p-tprj SieiAyppeva. 

KOU 8r] KOU TCL {cOOL KCLTCL y€VY) KCLL dytAa? Olov l>OfJL€L9 

Oeioi 8i€iAr)(f)€o-aL> 8atpoi>e9, avrdpict]? eh iravTa €kcl- 
e (ttos Ikolcttois wv oh clvtos eveptv, coare out dypiov 
r)v ov8lv ovre dXXrjAcou i8(o8al, iroAefios re ovk kvr\vh 
ov8e o-tolctls to irapcmav ccAXa 6' oaa Trjs TOiavT-qs 
eo~TL KaTaKoo~fii]o~€cos eiropeva, /jLvpi* av ely Xeyeiv. 
to 8 ovv t(dv dvOpteircov Ae)(6ev clvto/jLCltov irepi (3iov 
8td to TOi6v8e eiprjTai. 6eos eve^iev clvtovs olvtos 



Deities, 
each of 

wli'iin was 
all-miffi- 
cient for 

his own 
flock in all 
things. 
Then was 
nothing 
wild: no 
devouring 
one an- 
other : no 
war or dis- 
cord of any 
kind. All 



eivai. For SieiXrjppeva, cf. Al\ 
Pol. VII. 6 : (3Xeyj/as — -rrpbs ttii- 
<rav rrjv olKovfievrjv, cos 8ieiXr]Trrai 
toIs Wvea-iv. Cf. also Critias 
109 b : Geo! — airacrav yi]v nore 
Kara rovs roirovs 8ieXdy%avov ov 
Kara, epiv. For ravrbv rovro, cf. 

infr. 308 e : tout-op 87; poi rovd' 

1) ftaaiXiKr) (paiverai k.t.X. Legg. 

4,713c. I. e. as now there is 
a presiding deity in the Sun, 
the Earth, the Sea, and in sacred 
groves, &c, so then no place 
was devoid of the Divine Pre- 
sence and control : irdvra 8ai- 
fiovmv TrXrjpr), as Thales said, 
not 8ea>v eprjpa ehai iravra (Plat. 

Legg. 10, 908 c). It must be 
admitted that the text is not 
wholly free from suspicion. Cf. 
infr. 2y2e: 01 Kara rovs tottovs, 
and note. Qu. an. legend. 
wo-auTOJS 8' au Kara ronovs k.t.\.1 
atirws being dropped from ho- 
moioteleuton, the remaining 
letters, S' av, might easily be 
corrupted into vvv. The go- 
vernment of fiept] is in this case 
less harsh : the clause v-nb 6ea>v 
— 8iei\rjfj.fif'va being explanatory 
of Kara tottovs ravrov rovro (sc. 
e8pa, i. e. rjpX ev eTnp.eXovp.evos rov 
Koo-p.ov). 

2. Kai dyeXas] As the subdi- 



visions of each tribe. The word 
recals the previous discussion. 
3. 8ieiXrj<peo-av ] Answering 
to 8itiXT)p.p.eva. As the parts 
of the universe generally were 
distributed to several gods, so 
the lesser deities had the tribes 
of animals distributed amongst 
them. 6elot is to be joined with 

8aip.oves. 

avrapKrjs] Not self-sufficing, 
" but sufficient of himself ;" = 
airbs dpnav. Cf. SUpr. 268 a. 

5. ovre dXXrjXcov e'ScaSat] This 

thought is probably associated 
with the Orphic abstinence 
from animal food. 

6. ttjs TOiavTTjs] Sc. delas. 

7. Karo.Koo-pr)o-ea>s\ The ge- 
nitive is accounted for by 
supposing the participle to be 
added pleonastically. " What 
belongs to this mode of ten- 
dance and is consonant there- 
to." Cf. however Rep. 6, 504 

b : rav Trpoeiprjpevav enopevas 

drroSel^fis. 

8. r6 8' ovv] "And accord- 
ingly (to return to the point) 
the tradition that mankind in 
particular had a spontaneous 
subsistence is to be accounted 
for in the following way." 

9. debs eJTKTTaTow] The 



58 



nAATONOS 



iiruTTCLTMV, KaOdircp vvv avOpcoTroi, £coov ov erepov p. 271 
Oeiorepov, dXXa yevrj (fxxvXorepa avrcov vop.evovcri. 
ve'p.ovTO? 8e ixeivov TroXiTelal re ovk rjaav ovde ktt)- 
(T6L9 yvvaiKcov kou 7ral8cov' €K yrjs yap avefiiaxTKOvTO p. 272 
biravTes, ovSev p€p.vrjf.LevoL tcov irpocrOev. dXXa ra pev 
Toiavra cmrjv irdvra, Kapirovs 8e d(j)dovov9 ei)(Ov diro 
T€ SevSpoov kou 7roXXr)? vXrj? dXXijs, ov)( vtto yecopyia? 
(j)vopevovs, aAA' avToparrjs dvahiftovonqs tyjs yijs. 
yvp-voi 8e kou aorrpooToi OvpavXovvres ra iroXXa Ive- 



same belief in a past theo- 
cracy is expressed in the Laws, 
with a similar allusion to the 
Satumia regna, and is used to 
point the same lesson, — that a 
paternal government, as man- 
kind are now constituted, is a 
visionary dream, and that the 
rule of Law, devised by rea- 
son, which is all which re- 
mains to us of Divine guid- 
ance, is the best available 
substitute ; 4, 7 1 3 c : olov vvv 
TjpeTs 8pa>p.ev rots iroip.vioicri nai 
oo~a>v rjfxepot, elcriv aye\ai' ov j3ovs 
@o£>v oi8e aiyas alycbv ap^ovras 
noiovpev avroio-'i rivas, ahX facts 
avrcov 8ecrir6£op.ev, ilpeivov eKelvcov 
yevos. ravrbv 8f] (cat 6 deos apa 
(cat (pCkdvBpaTTOs mv to yevos 
cip.eivov T]p.a>v eCpicrTr] ro ra>v 8ai- 
p.6v<ov, b 81a. 7roAX/J9 pev avrols 
pao-roiVt]s TToXXfjs 8' ijp.iv enipe- 
Xovpevov r)pa>v, elpijvrjv re /cat atSco 
(cat evvop,lav (cat d(pdoviav 8iKrjs 
Trapeyopevov daracriaaTa (cat ev- 
8aipova ra ra>v dvdpdiTrcov dneip- 
yd£ero yevrj, 

I. e7ricrrarcoi>] Cf. Gorg. 523 
C : 01 eirifieKrJTai. 

3. 7roXiT€tat] Forms of go- 
vernment are rendered super- 
fluous by the presence of a 
Supreme Will. 



re] The apodosis is broken 
off through the expansion of this 
clause by an afterthought, and 
is resumed in ndpnovs 8e infr. 
Compare with this passage the 
description in the Protagoras, 
p. 321, of the state of man be- 
fore the introduction of the 
arts of life ; and Glaucon's va>i> 
7roXis in the Republic, 2,372. The 
absence of property and mar- 
riage in the perfect state is again 
mentioned in the well-known 
passage of the Laws, 5, 739. 

4. dvefiiwo-Kovro] Rising from 
the dust of former genei'ations. 
Cf. supr. 271 b. 

5. ov8ev pepv7]p.evoi\ Hav- 
ing been steeped in the river 
of forgetfulness, Rep. 10, 62 1 e : 
and therefore ignorant of all 
previous relationships. 

6. and re 8ev8pa>v] Cf. Hes. 
Op. et D. 233 : Wv8Uaio-i p.er 
dv8pao-i I Tolai (pepei fiev yaia 
ito\vv (Biov, ovpeat 8e 8pvs axpr) 
p.ev re Cpepei (Sakuvovs, p-eaar) 8e 

pe\lo-cras (c.r.X. ; and Horn. Od. 

T. Ill: Cpeprjai re yaia p.e\aiva 
7rvpovs (cat KpiBds, ftpldrjo-i re 8ev- 

8pea Kapna, quoted elsewhere 
by Plato, Rep. 2, 363. 

9. evep-ovro] " Lived under 
their shepherd's care." 



nOAITIKOS. 



59 



272. fiovro' to yap tu>v tbpcov clvtols aXvirov €K€KpaTO, 
paXaKas Se evvcts ei^ov ava(pvop.evqs €K yi]9 noa? 
h a(})0ovov. tov Si] filov, co ^aiKpare?, aKovas pev tov 
twv eVi Kpovov Tovbe b\ ov # Xoyo? eVrt Aihs elvai, 
tov vvvl irapcov olvtos rjcrOrjaaL. Kplvat <5' avTolv tov 
ev8cupov€o~T€pov dp av dvvaio re kcu WeX-qaetas ; 

NE. 20. OvSapm. 

HE. BouAet SrjTa eyco aoi Tpoirov tivol SiaKplvco ; 

NE. 20. Haw p.ev ovv. 

HE. Ei pev tolvvv ol TpocptpoL tov Kpovov, ira- 



of wives 
and chil- 
dren, for 
they sprang 
fromEarth, 
not know- 
ing wlience 
they came. 

' Contrast, 
their life, 
devoid of 
care, in a 
perfect cli- 
mate, tak- 
ing no more 
thought for 
raiment 
than the 

IO lilies of the 



I . to yap tcov copa>v ] Cf. 

Odyss. A. 565-8; Hdt. I. 142; 
Plat. Legg. 5, 747. 

3. dKovets pev] Subaud. 
jjarBrja-ai S' ov (" although you 
have not seen"). 

4. bv * Adyo? — eivai ] bv 
a>s CH rcB cos cett. This pro- 
bably implies the same feeling 
of half- credulous or ironical 
respect towards the popular 
religion which appears in Tim. 
40 d. To Plato the mythology 
of his countrymen was but a 
rumour, an echo from the past. 

5. iTapwv] " As an eye-wit- 
ness." So the word is fre- 
quently used (pleonastically as 
here) by Sophocles, e. g. (Ed. 
Col. 1587. 

Kplvai 8' — tov evhaipovecTTe- 

poi>] Compare the judgment 
between the just and unjust 
life in Rep. 2, 360 d, and be- 
tween pleasure and knowledge 
in Phileb. 52 e. 

8. rpoTTov rti/a] I. e. hypo- 
thetically. 

10. El pev — xP eias ] Compare 
with the doubt here expressed 
as to the happiness of the 
golden age, the rejection in 
the Republic (2, 372) of the 



simple or primitive state as a 
basis for the definition of jus- 
tice. The picture of an earthly 
paradise has been purposely 
heightened, in order to enforce 
the remark that this is not the 
chief good of man. Cf. Eu- 
thyd. 289 b : ovde ye el rts 
ecrriv e7no~Tr]pr], coore aOavarovs 
iroieiv civev tov inio-TacrdaL Tjj 
cidavacriq \prjO-8ai, ovbe tcivttjs 
eoiKev ocpe'hos ov8e'v. See also 
LyS. 221 e : Horepov, rjv A - ' eyco, 
npos Aios, eav to kcikov aTToXrjTcu, 
ovSe Treivfjv en ecrTai ov8e Biyp-fp, 
ov8e ciXXo ov8ev tcov toiovtcov 

k.t.X. The identification of 
the king with the shepherd, 
and the notion of a theocracy, 
to which Plato here inclines, 
but which he rejects as un- 
suited to the present state of 
man, seem to be of Pythago- 
rean origin. Cf. Pythagor. Fr. 
§ 2. (Mullach p. 533) : *E X « 8e 

Kol cos 6e6s 7roTt Koapov paaiXevs 
Trpbs ivokiVj kcu cos iroXis ttotI koct- 
pov, /3acrtXei(S irpos 6e6v. a pev yap 
noXis Ik ttoXXcov Ka\ 8ia(pep6vTcov 
o-vvappocrdelcra Kocrpco avvTa^iv 
Ka\ appoviav peplpaTat, 6 8e /3a- 
criXeis cipxav e'x<ov avvnevOvvov, 
Ka\ avTos Cov vopos ep\f/vxos, deos 

I Z 



60 nAATONC)2 

povtrqs avTois ovtco 7roXXr/? cr^oA?}? kul Svvaptcos p. 272^2 
717509 to jju) p.6uov avOpwirois aXXa koll Orjploi? Sia 
Xoyoov fivvaaOca ^vyyiyvecrOai, Karexpwvro tovtols c 
£y\nra(Tiv eir\ <])iXo<TO(]uav, perd re 6r)pii£>v koli per 
5 aXX^Xcou optXovvTe?, kou irvv6av6p.evoL irapa Truo-rjs 
(puo-eo)9 ei TLva tls id lav Svvapiv eyovaa fjaOero tl 
diatyopov tcov aXXcov as* auvayupphv (ppovr)ar€cos, 



ev avopcoTTOis 7rapeo~x r ll JLaTLa " raL - 

Ibid. § 3, p. 535 ; 6c6iuii6v 

e'vrc n pay pa fiacriXeia. These 

fragments, however, belong to 
a later time. See Introduction 
to the Statesman, § 3. It is 
left uncertain what deity had 
charge of the human race. But 
the notion of Deity is so far 
generalized that this matters 
little. See, hoAvever, the words 
rav eir\ Kpovov — ol rpocpipoi rov 
Kpovov. 

(9.) ol rp6(pip.oi rov Kpovov] 
" The flock or charge (lit. 
'nurslings') of Kpovos." The 
name is peculiarly applicable 
in the present case, where the 
Deity in charge not only go- 
verns, but attends to all the 
varied wants of those whom 
he governs, avrapKrjs $>v ols 

avros vep.ii. So also in Rep. 
and Laws, those for whose 
education the speakers are 
providing are spoken of by 
the same affectionate name. 

R e P- 7 j 5 2 ° d : 'AneiOrjO-ovo-iv 
rjp.1v ol rpocpipoi ; Legg. >], 804 
a : ravrbv 8r) Kai tovs f/perepovs 
rpocpipovs Set. 

2. dWa ko\ 6rjpiois~\ The 
traces of this in the regular 
mythology were few. (Cf. 
however, the stories of Procne, 
Philomela, and the like.) But 
the Fables of iEsop, and the 



cycle to which they belonged 
— partly invented to please 
the childish imagination, but 
probably not without sugges- 
tions from Egypt and the East 
— were sufficient to suggest 
the idea to Plato. See also 
Porphyr. V. Pythag. 1 9 : (llvOa- 
yopas <firjO~\v\ ore Trdvra ra yiyvo- 
peva ep\j/V)(a opoyevi) 8ei vopi^eiv. 
5. Kal Trvv8av6pevoi\ If other 

creatures besides man could 
tell their experience, science 
would rest on a wider basis. 

7. els avvayvppov <fipovr)o-e<0s] 

" To contribute to the store of 
wisdom." (Cf. Legg. 8, 845 e: 
v8wp — o-vvayvpr6v.} The idea 
that knowledge comprises all 
the actual relations of things, 
and arises only from the in- 
terrogation of the most varied 
experience, belongs to the 
maturity of Plato's thought. 
Cf. Soph. 259 d. For itho-a 
(pvo-is, cf. Rep. 2, 359 c : 6 

ivao~a (pvais 8ia>Keiv ire(pvKev o>s 

aya66v. The close and friendly 
intercourse with Nature, which 
Plato here imagines, is well 
described in the little German 
fable 'The Story without an 
End.' One point of coinci- 
dence may be quoted — when 
the child goes to sleep in the 
cave, the grass springs up spon- 
taneously to make his pillow. 



nOAITIKOS. 



61 



272. tVKpiTOV OTL TCOV VVV OL TOT€ pVpLCp 7TpO$ CvSaLflOVLav 

fiiefepov, el 8e iparnrXapevoL ctltoov d8i]v koll ttotcov 
SieXeyovTo irpos dXXyXov? koll tol Orjpia fivOovs, ola 
d Srj koll tol vvv irep\ olvtcov XeyovTai, koll tovto, m ye 
Kara rrjv epyv doljav d7ro(j)ijvaadaL, koll paX' evKpL- 
rov. opco? <5' ovv ravra pev d(pcopev, eoo? av rjpiv 

/JLTJVVTrjS TL9 LKOLVOS (PoLvfj, 7TOT€pCO? 01 TOT€ TOLS IttlOv- 

p.ia<s eiyov TTtpi re e7naTr]pa>v koll ttj? tgov Xoycov 
Xpela?' 01) $ €V€kcl tov p.v6ov rjyelpapev, tovto Xck- 
tcov, Iva to fJLerd tovto els to irpocrOev irepaivcopev. 
'R7T€LSr) yap irdvTcov tovtcov y^povos eTeXecodrj koll 
pL€Ta/3oXrfv edet yiyvecrOaL koll Srj koll to yqLvov rfSrj 
e 7rdv dvr/XcoTO yevos, irdcras eKao-Tr)? Trjs \j/vx^ Ta $ 



the way in 

which the 
Quislings 
<>f Baton) 
employed 

their gold- 
en time. 
Now when 
5 that cycle 
was at an 
end, and 
each soul 
had ful- 
filled the 
number of 
her births 
from Earth, 
the pilot 
of the Uni- 
verse let go 
the helm. 
Rebound- 
ing with a 
shock, the 
mighty 



JO 



The same conception of in- 
quiry, as a conversation with 
the object of study, appears in 
Legg. 3, 689 e : Trdcras cos enos 
elnelv SirjpoorrjKa tcis Koivcovlas. 
" Inquiring from every nature, 
to see if one having some 
peculiar power had perceived 
something different from the 
rest which might be gathered 
into wisdom's treasury." 

2. el Se ep.TriirXdp.evoi — ] Cf. 
Legg. 7, 807 d : toIs 8tj Tairrj 
KeKoaprjpevois apa ovdev Xeinope- 
vov eariv kciI Tvavrcnracnv Trpocrrj- 
kov, dXX' iv Tponcp Qoa-K-qparos 
etccKTTOv niaivopevov avrcov 8el 

grjv. Rep. 3, 407 a, b : 6 8e 8rj 

irXovaios ovdev e^ei toiovtov 

epyov itpoKelpevov, ov avayna^o- 
pevw dwexeadai dftiooTov. 

3. ofa] Flor. b. Ven. S. 0T01. 
In either case pvdoi is to be sup- 
plied as the subject of Xeyovrai. 

6. S' ovv] But to resume. 

7. 7roTepcos] The clause de- 
pends on the verbal notion in 

prjvvTrjs. 



9. tov pxiOov rjyelpapev] " We 
have waked from long slumber 
a ghost which seems unwilling 
to be laid." Cf. Rep. 5, 346 a : 

ocrov Xoyov rrdXiv Kivelre rrepl rrjs 
TroXiTelas ! — ovk tcrrf oaov eapov 
Xoycov irreyelpere. 

10. iva — nepalvoopev] " That 
we may get forward with what 
is still before us." Cf. Rep. 1, 

346 a : iva ti Kai 7repal.voop.ev. 

11. ttcivtoov tovtcov ^po'i'os ] 
" The time required for all 
that has been described." 

12. efiei] Cf. Prot. 321 c : 

■q elpappevr/ rjpepa napr)v iv fj edei 
Kal avdpooTTov i£ievai etc yrjs els 

(pas. Compare Emped. w. 66- 

69 : hvTap inel peya NelKos evi 
peXeeacriv edpeepGr] | es Tipas t 
dvopovcre, TeXeiopevoio \povoio, 
o acpiv dpoi(3a~tos TrXaTeos TrapeXrj- 
XaTat 'OpKOV. 

to yrjivov yevos ] " The 

race whose generation was 
from the Earth." 

13. irda-as — a7ro8e8ooKvias ] 
" Having completed her pro- 



62 



IIAATQNQ2 



y€V€(T€LS riTrodtSooKvias, haa r]v eKaaTrj irpoaruyOtv, p. 27s 



per cycle of births." For Pla- 
to's doctrine of transmigra- 
tion, see Phredo 82, 113, 114 ; 
Rep. 10,618-620; Pbsedr. 248, 
249 ; Tim. 42. According to 
the Phsedrus (248 e), the pe- 
riod here spoken of must be at 
least 10,000 years. Empe- 
doclcs and Pindar speak of 
30,000. Tpi? fiii> pvpias &pas 
dnu p<v<dpQ)i> aXaXrjadat. 

I. on a — Trecrovarjs] " Having 

fallen in so many sowings into 
the earth as it was appointed 
unto each (to fall) :" i. e. having 
been sown in earth so many 
times. Tbese words have oc- 
casioned some difficulty. Cor- 
narius, followed as usual by 
Stephanus, read ko.1 8<ra, but 
the clause is explanatory of 
the preceding, and hence the 
asyndeton. (Modestus cau- 
tusque quurn alias turn in 
Platone criticus Stephanus, 
interdum tamen, ubi Ficinum 
Cornariumve temere sequitur, 
adeb sui est dissimilis vix ut vi- 
rum agnoscas. Heindorf.) Most 

MSS. have 77poo-Tax8evros avrct. 
Badh. COnj.oVa r\v enacTr] ra npoo-- 
raxSevra, Toaavra els yrjiva (TTTep- 
para ela^vcrijs. And the Zurich 
editors, adopting a conjecture 
of Sauppe's, read yrjs enreppara 
("having fallen into so many 
germs of earth"). But the clod 
cannot be called a germ until 
united with a soul. Tbe soul 
is rather the seed implanted in 
the earth. Stallbaum suggests 
two renderings, making Toa-avra 
cnreppaTa equivalent either to 
Kara roa-avra (nreppara, or to cor 
roaavra aneppara, the accusative 
in the latter case being put for 
the genitive by attraction from 



ova. The latter alternative is 
to be rejected, not only because 
of die harshness of this attrac- 
tion, but because no one who 
wished to say " a soul must be 
born so many limes from the 
earth," would think of expres- 
sing himself thus, "a soul 
must fall into the earth as so 
many seeds." In the former 
Stallbaum has perhaps (for he 
speaks obscurely) indicated the 
true rendering : according to 
which arreppara retains more 
than usual of a verbal signi- 
fication (cf. the unusual mean- 
ing of Speppa, inf. 289 b), and 
is in the accusative cognate 
after Trecrovo-rjs, while els yf]v 
depends partly on -neaovo-qs, 
but directly and chiefly on 
a-Treppara. The sense becomes 
clear when o-Trapeio-qs is substi- 
tuted in thought for ireaovo-qs. 
If Plato had written Toaavra 
els yfjv (nreppara anapeicrqs (or 
TTTcopara neaovo-qs, cf. .ZEsch. 

Prom. 921), there could have 
been no doubt as to his mean- 
ing. Cf. Legg. 8, 841 d : 
advra Se naK'XaKcbv CT7rep|a.aTa pq 
cmeipeiv, pqbe ayova dppevcov Trapa 
cpvo-iv : and compare Tim. 4 1 e : 

Se'oi Se o-rrapeiaas avTas{ras^/vxds) 
els ra TvpoaqnovTa eKaarais e<aara 
opyava XP° V0V 4>vvcil ^mwv to 
6eo(Tej3e(TTaTov. lb. 42 c!: ecmeipe 
tovs pev els yqv, tovs S' els ae\q- 
vqv, tovs 8' els TaWa Sera opyava 
Xpovov. to Se pera rbv a-nopov 
toIs veois irapeScoKe 6eo7s acopaTa 
TrkaTTeLV 6vr]Ta k.t.X. TllUS the 

souls are sown into the earth 
and there a body is given to 
each. The verbal meaning of 
oireppa ( = the act of sowing, 
not the seed,) occurs in Hes. 



nOAITIKOS. 



63 



ToaavTOL els yr\v aireppara 7T€aov(n]?, rare <5?/ rod 
ttolvtos 6 fiev KvfiepvrjTy?, olov irrj^aXicov omko? d<j)6- 
lievoS) ei? ty]v olvtov 7repiamr]v direaTi], tov 8e Si] 
Koafxov ttolXlv auearpei^ev €i/uLapfjL€i>r) re kcu ^v/x([)uto? 
67ri0vpla. iravres ovv oi Kara tov? tottovs o-vvdpypv~ I 



destruction 
of all kinds 
of life: till, 
settling by 
degrees 
into his 
own path, 
he followed, 

as far as 



Op. et D. 77 9» weppaTos 8p£a- 
a6m, and Soph. CEd. Tyr. 

1246, pvrjprjv iraKaiuiv (JTreppd- 

raiv exovfra. See Passow's Lex. 
s. v. Although the imagery 
is different, the word Treaovarjs 
recals not only the passage of 
the Timaeus just cpioted (4 1 e), 
but the prime calamity of the 
soul described in the Phsedrus. 
The above rendering is also 
given by C. F. Hermann. This 
additional reason for the ter- 
mination of the cycle gives fresh 
plausibility to the story. 

1. rod tvclvtos 6 peu Kvfiepvi)- 

r?;y] tov ttovtos heads the sen- 
tence, displacing pev, because 
the Universe is the real sub- 
ject of all that follows. 

2. 7TT]8a\[cQv ouikos] " The 
tiller of the helm." The o'lag 
was the part of the steering 
apparatus next the steersman's 
hand (Pollux, I. 89 : cf. iEsch. 
Ag. 649, o'Icikos tfiyo!)!'). 

3. els tt)v avTov nepicoTrrju 

anio-rrj] " Retired to his own 
pinnacle of contemplation." 
Cf. Horn. II. g. 8, 23, 451 ; 
Od. K. 146. The conception 
of the Timseus is more ele- 
vated (42 e) : Ka\ 6 pev 8fj 
anavra ravra diaratjas ep.e\>€v ev 
to> eavrov Kara rpoirov fjdet. 

Though the idea of place is 
almost entirely absent here, 
it may be remembered that 
the central fire of the Pytha- 
goreans was called Aioy <pv\aKr] ; 



and we may recal the v&rov tov 
oipavov, which is the vantage- 
ground of speculation in the 
Phaedrus. 

4. elpappevr/] Cf. et>ei above, 

and the necessity pointed out 
in p. 269 d, e. Cf. Tim. 470, 

Sq<p : pepiypevrj yap ovv f] Tov8e 
tov Koapov yevecris e£ ai/ayiajs 
Te KCU vox) o-vo-Tno-ews eyevvl)6r). 

crvp(pvTos iiri6vpia\ This " in- 
nate proclivity" may be com- 
pared with the blind principle 
of spontaneous motion alluded 
to in Tim. 30 a : iruv ocrov r/v 
oparbv irapa\a(BcQV o{/)( rjcrv\'iav 
ayov ciAXa Kivovpevov TrXrjppelycos 

kcu iituktcos. It is to be ob- 
served that this has a direction 
opposite to the will of God. 

5. 01 KO.TU TOVS TOTTOVS deoY] 

It is evident from this that the 
government of the several re- 
gions was not wholly commit- 
ted to the subordinate deities. 
The Divine operation, imme- 
diate on the whole, was at 
once immediate and mediate 
in every part. If the text of 
251 e is sound, there is a false 
echo in Kara robs tottovs — since 
Kara tottovs, in the former pas- 
sage as it now stands expresses 
the partial nature of the Divine 
superintendence in the present, 
and not its distribution in the 
former, cycle. The language 
resembles Phsedr. 246 e : tu8' 

eneTai o-TpciTia 6eav ts kcu 8cu- 
povcov Kara evdeKO. peprj KCKOcrpr]- 



64 



nAATONOS 



memorj 
served, his 
Gather's in- 
struction. 
But he 
forgot this 
by degrees, 
from being 
enclosed in 
;i " muddy 
vesture of 
decay," 
which 
clung to 
him from 
the chaos 
out of 
which he 
was at first 



res" Tcr> peyurTco Sul/jlovl Oeol, yi/ovre? rfdr) to yiyvo- p. 27.1:; 
ptevov, a(j)ieaav av to. p.epi] tov KocrpLov rr;? clvtgov 
eV^/xeAe/a?. 6 <5e ptTao-Tpecpopevo? /cat £vp(3a\Acov, p. 27 
apXV? Te KaL TeXevrrjs ivavTiav opprjv op/irjOei^, crei- 

5 a/JLov ttoXvv iv eavTW iroi&v, aKkqv av (frQopav ^cocov 
iravTOKov aTTtipya.cra.To- p.6Ta he Tama irpoeXOovTOs 
LKavov )(povov, 0opv(3a>v T€ Koi Tapa^rj^ rjSr] irav- 
op.evos Kal tcov o~eicrp.(DV, ya\y')vr]9 einkafiop.evos eh 
re tov elcoOora Spopov tov eavTOi) KaTaK0ap.0vp.ev09 

l oj]6i, eTTLfieXetav /cat /cparos* e^oav avTos tcov iv avTa> b 



fMfVTj — raw S' aXXwv iaoi iv rw 
twv 8a>8eKa dpidpSt reraypieVoi 
6eol apxovres, I'lyovvrai Kara ra£iv 
fjv eKaaros eraxdrj. £u/i/3aAAa)x> 
sc. iavT<0 : — " coming together 
with a, shock :" cf. Theophr. de 

SeilSU I : tovs tvttovs avdyKt) 
avpfidWeiv iavTols, Soph. CEd. 
Col. 901 : 'iv6a 8l(TTOfioi /jLaXiara 
o~vp[3dWovo-iv iprrdpcov 6801. Hom. 

II. n. 565. And compare the 
frequent use of avp^dXXco in 
Hdt. to express conflict in war. 
I. rep peyiarcp 8aipovi #eoi] 
Badham conjectures to jac- 
yiCTTW SaifJ.oi'es Qedj. Cf. supr. 
271 d, infr. 274 b, Legg. 8, 

848 C : 6ea>v re Kal tcov irropevcov 
Oeols 8uifx6vav. lb. *] , 82 1 a: 
tov /xeyio-rov 8ebv Kal 6'Xoi> tov 

koo-jxov. See however supr. 
271 d, e, where 8aipa>v and Beds 
are interchanged. 

4. dpxqs re Kal reA. — opprj- 

6eis] " Having received an im- 
pulse opposite, both in respect 
of beginning and end," — the 
■KoQev and the 71-ot. This of 
course happens when a circular 
motion is reversed : and aggra- 
vates the violence of the imme- 
diate shock. Had the world 
" gone off" at a tangent," the 



beginning would have been the 
former end, but the end not 
the former beginning. 

5. aXkrjv av Cp6opdv\ Supr. 

270 c. 

8. els tov eladoTu 8popov\ The 
vibrations are supposed to 
cause a temporary perturba- 
tion or nutation of the cir- 
cular motion, as in a top that 
is not " asleep." 

The notion of vast cycles is 
assumed in the Laws. Cf. 3, 
680 a, where the first survi- 
vors of the flood are called of 

iv TovTd roi pepei ttjs 7repid8ov 
yeyovdres. lb. 6, 782 a : TrdXeav 
o-vo-rdo-eis Kal (pdopds Kal iiriTr)8ev- 
para ivavTola ragecos re Kal dra^ias 
Kal fipaaeos Kal Trcopdrcov re apa Kal 
ftpcopdraiv iTTi6vp.iip.aTa 7ravTo8and 
ndvTos Kal rvepl Tvdcrav ttjv yrjv 
ap ovk oldpeda yeyovivai, Kal 
o-Tpo<fids a>pa>v 7ravTolas, ev als 
to. £a>a peTa(3dX\eLV avToiv irap- 
TrXrjdels /xeraj3oXas etKosj 

ei'sre — KaTaKoapovpevos] "Set- 
tling down into his accus- 
tomed course." Cf. Eep. 8, 

560 a : al8ovs tlvos Zyyevopivqs 
iv tji tov ve'ov ^v^f) — KaTeKoo~pr)6r) 
rrdXiv. Supr. 271 e. Qu. an. 
omittend. re 1 



nOAITIKOS. 



65 



p73* T€ KaL eCLVTOV, T1~)V TOV 8l]/lL0Vpy0V KCU 7T(XTpOS U7T0- 

/jLvrjfjLOvevcov SiSa^rju el? 8vvap.LV. kolt dpyas p.ev 
ovv aKpifiecrTepov direTeXei, TeXevTcov 8e d/xfiXvTepov. 
tovtcov 8e avrcp to acop.aToet8e? tyj? avyKpdaeco? 

OLITLOV, TO TY]? TTaXoU 7TOTC (j)VCr€C09 tjl)VTpO(j)OV, OTL 

iroXXrjs rjv jxtTeypv aTatjla? irp\v el? tov vvv Koap.ov 
dcpiKeaflcu. Trapa pcev yap rod avvOevTO? irdvTa rd 
KaXd KeKTTjrar irapd 8e tyj? ep.7rpoo~6ev e^eco?, ocra 
c \aXeird kcll d8iKa ev ovpavw ylyverai, ravra e'tj e'/ce/- 
vrj? avTO? re eyei koI to?? ftooi? evairepyaJ^erai. fiera 
fiev ovv rov KvftepvrjTOv to. (coa Tpe(pcov ev avTco 
cr/jLiKpd p.ev (pXavpa, fxeydXa 8e everiKTev dyadd' 
\copi^6p.evo? be eKeivov tov eyyvrara ypovov del tyj? 



brought by 
his Crea- 
tor : fY'iii 
whom he 
derives all 
that he has 
of good : 
and in con- 
5 junction 
with whom, 
in that 
former 
cycle, the 
evil within 
him is re- 
duced to a 
minimum. 
But that 
guiding 
hand being 
withdrawn, 
as forget- 
fulness in- 
creases the 
ancient 



10 



I. Trarpos] Cf. Tim. 28 e, 
37 d. The word is used here 
for the sake of the metaphor, 
" Calling to mind his father's 
instruction •" as in Tim. 42 e : 
vorfaavres 01 irai8es rr)v tov Tra- 
rpos bidra^iv, fxifj.ovfj.evoi tov 
(npeTepov 8rjfj.iovpyov. 

3. dfiftXvrepov] " "With less 

sharpness and precision," as if 
making an inferior copy of 
some masterpiece of sculpture 
or painting, or, " with dimin- 
ished powers," " with less in- 
sight," " with less keenness of 
vision." The latter is more 
probable. 

4. tovtcov 8e — dcpiKecrdai ] 

" Now this falling off comes to 
the world from the bodily- 
element of her composition, 
which was inherent in her pri- 
mal nature, since this partook 
of much disorder, before at- 
taining the present organised 
form." Cf. Tim. 30 a : ttov 

ocrov rjv oparbv TrapaXaficdv cv% 
fjO~v)(iav ayov dXka. Kivovfievov 



TT'\r]p.u.e\a)S Kal draKrcos, els Tafjiv 
avTO ijyayev in rr)s dratjias. on — 

d(piKeo-8ai is epexegetic of the 
previous clause. For the iden- 
tity of the oparbv and o-coparo- 
ei8es, cf. Phfedo 80 c: to opa- 
rbv avrov to o~a>p.a. Several 
MSS., including All, have fie- 
roxov. 

8. Trapa. 8e rr)s eixTrpocrQev 

e|eo)r] Thus a time is ima- 
gined before the alternate cy- 
cles began. Compare the 
thought in Rep. 10, 613, of 
the just man : ova ye airb decov 
yiyverai, iravra yiyvedai cos oiov 
re apiara, el fir) tl dvayKalov 
avrco kokov e< Trporepas dpaprlas 
imijpxev. 

Trapa 8e — f£fW, e'£ eiceivrjs] 

The expression at first cor- 
responds to Trapa p.ev — tov avv- 
devros, but when resumed for 
the sake of emphasis in a pro- 
nominal form, is more strictly 
adapted to the immediate con- 
text. 

13. tov eyyvrara xpoVoi/ dei 

K 



m 



nAATONOS 



aliaivliy 

gradually 
returns, 

until the 
world and 
all depend- 
ent organ- 
isms are in 
danger of 
ruin. 

"Wherefore 
then the 
first dis- 
poser of the 
world, lest 
he should 
founder in 



a0ecrea)? KaXXtara iravra Sidyet, ir poiovTOS <5e tov p. 2J' : I' 
Xpovov Kol XijOi]? eyyiyi>opL€i>r}9 ip avrco fxaWov kcll 
Swaarevei to Trj? 7raXcaas uvapfiocrTias wado?, re- d 
Xzvtcovtos Se l^avOa. tov \povov kol crpuKpd fxlv 
STayaOa, ttoXXi-jv 8e ri]v tcov ivavTtaiV Kpaaiv eVey/ce- 
pavvvpievos eVi diacjjOopas kivSvvov olvtov re a.(f)L- 
Kvfirat kol tcou ip amui. dio 8rj kcu tot rj8r] Beo? 6 
Koaprjaa9 glvtop, KaOopcov iv ouKopious ovtol, ki]86- 



pL€VO?, 



M 



7 \eip.acr6eL9 viro Tapa)09 SiaXvOeh els 



TTJs dcpeo-eas] Proximum quod- 
que ab remissione tempus. 

2. pdWov Kol — 7rd#o?] " The 
influence of the old habit of 
disorder also gains a greater 
ascendancy." Plato's use of 

7rd#oj, as of yevevis, is often 
difficult to render from its 
generality. Cf. Theast. 193 d. 



4. egavdel] " Breaks out 
into full bloom." Sc. t6 t^s- 
dvappoarias nddos. Cf. infr. 
310 d : TeXeuTcicra 8e i^avQelv 
iravTamacnv pavlais. Aesch. Pers. 
821.: vj3pis yap ef-avdova itcap- 
7ra>o~e o-raxvv arrjs. So Stallb. and 

Passow s. v. In what follows, 
the sentence returns to the ge- 
neral subject, 6 Koap.os. The 
other renclei'ing, however, de- 
serves notice ; in which 6 koV- 
fios is the subject of i£av8ei, 
which is explained to mean 
" leaves blossoming," " ceases 
to produce anything good." 

5. 7toXKtjv eTveynepavvvpevos] 

"Administering evil to itself 
in large measure." ineyKepav- 
vvpevos, lit. " pouring into itself 
additionally." The world is a 
great vessel, in which differ- 
ent elements are mixed : and 
during this cycle is itself the 



author of the mixture. (Kpumv, 
abstract for concrete). Or per- 
haps the participle is passive, 
" Receiving large admixture of 
evil." (The passive of a verb 
which governs the dative in 
the active voice appears in 
Re P- 1 , 337 a, and Legg. 11, 
925 e, 926 a, 937 b.) For 
the image, cf. Rep. 8, 562 c : 

7rdXtf eXevdepias Si\j/r](ra(ra kokcov 

OiVO)(6cOV TTpOCTTaTOVVTCdV TVXV 

k.t.X. For the force of the 

prefix in eTreyKepavvvpevos, cf. 
eVeyxeoo, e. g. iEsch. Ag. 1 1 3 7 . 

6. diacpdopds] This word, 
if alone, would have been 
passive, but by the addition 
of the genitives is turned to 
an active meaning. 

8. KTjftopevos tva prj] " In 

care for the world that it may 
not" &c. A similar feeling 
appears in Legg. 2, 653 c : 

deol fie oiKTeipavTes to tcov dvdpai- 
ttu>v eirinovov 7re<pvKos yivos — 
Movaas ATroWcovd re povcrrjyeTrjv 
Kai Alovvctov ^vveopracrras i'800-av, 
iv inavopOavTat tcls rpocpds yevo- 
pevas iv rais ioprals pera 6ea>v. 

9. Iva pt] 8vt] ] " Lest 

being tost with tempest it 
might be shaken in pieces and 



nOAITIKOS. 



67 



273. TOV TYJ9 aVO/JLOLOTr/TO? OLTTeipOV OVTOL TOTTOV 8vr}, irdXiV 

e(pe8po9 avrov twv 7n]8a\la>i> yiyvo\JLtvo<s, to. voar)- 
e cravTa koll kuOevra eV rfj KaO' eavTov rrporepa irdpt- 
68a> aTpeyjfav, Koafiei re kcu iiravopOoiv aOavarov 
avrov koll ayrjpcov threpyatjETaL. tovto pev ovv reAos 5 
airavTOdU elprjTOLL. to 8* eVi ri^v tov fiacriAecos airo- 

8tL^LV 'lKCLVOV €K TOV TTpoaOtV 0L7TT0p.€U0L? TOV \6yOV. 

crTpecpOevTos yap av tov Koa/mov ttjv hri tx]v vvv 
yevecfLv o8ov to t^s* rjKiKtas av TraXLv \0~TaT0 K.a\ 



■ 

of dissimili- 
tude, re- 
verses tlir 
process of 
decay, and 
restores 
him to im- 
mortal 
youth. 
The wheel 
i8 thus 
brought 
full circle : 
but for our 
present 
purpose 



founder in the abyss of dis- 
similitude." For a glimpse of 
the darkening path towards 
this limbo of " chaos come 
again," see Parrn. 165 ; Tim. 
48 e-52 d. In the chaos of 
Anaxagoras, the 6p.otopepeiai 
were at least latent ; but to 
this new and worse chaos even 
this degree of consistency is 
denied. The words aneipov 
ovra recall Pythagorean asso- 
ciations. 

1. Tonov has been objected 
to. Stallbaum would read 
ttovtov, and M. Wagner, in the 
Kheinische Museum, has sug- 
gested tvttov, which is too ab- 
stract for the context (x €i - 
pao-dels — 8vrj). Stallbaum's ob- 
jection (Displicet istud roVo*/, 
quo rnetaphoraa elegantia pes- 
sumdatur) forgets the differ- 
ence between metaphor and 
allegory. The vagueness of to- 
kos in Plato's use ( = "region") 
exactly suits the passage. Cf. 
Theset. 176 a ; Phsedr. 247 c, 
274 d; Soph. 254 a; Rep. 
6, 508 c, 7, 516 b, 532 d, 10, 
614 c. 

Trakiv — yiyvopevos] " Again 
presiding at the helm." e'cpedpos 
not = " successor," (Ast. Lex. 



s. v.,) but according to the 
tragic use with the genitive, 
" seated on or at." 

3. iv rfj — nepiuSa] " In the 
former circuit which the world 
made by himself." Ka6' iavrov 
depends on the verbal notion 
m 7repi6da>. 

4. o-Tptyas] " Having re- 
versed." Not only arresting 
decay, but causing growth : 
rfj rpoirfi avvavaKVKKovpevrjs els 
Tavavria rrjs yeveaews, as before. 

5. reXos dndvTcou etprjTai] Our 

account of each recurring cycle 
is complete. " The wheel is 
brought full circle." 

7. iKavdv ] Subaud. rjp.lv 

\eyftv. 

€K tov fvpoo-dev divTopevois 

tov \6yov] " Taking hold of 
the story by the previous 
part." I. e. attaching what 
we have to say to an earlier 
point in the fable, viz. the 
(pdopd mentioned in 273 a, as 
ensuing on the change from 
the obedient to the self-di- 
rected movement of the world. 
8. ttjv — 686v] "Towards 
the present operation of na- 
ture." Cf. note on yeveaeo)*, 
supr. 271 b. 



K 2 



68 



nAATONOS: 



we must 
revert to 

the in -in- 
ning of the 
period in 

w hirli WO 

live: when, 
the uni- 
verse being 
left to it- 
self, the 
bodies that 
were dwin- 
dlingbegan 
to grow, 
and those 
which had 
just sprung 
in full ma- 
turity from 
the Earth, 
put on grey- 
locks, and 
went be- 
neath the 
ground. 
Then, as 



Kaiva rdvavrla dTre8i8ov rdis rare, rd fiev yap vtto p. 273 
(TfiLKpoTijTo^ oXiyov 8eovra T)(f)ai>t(T0aL TCOV (fiXtiV 
■>lv£di>€TO, to. 5' e/c yr)$ veoytvrj acouara ttoXlci (j)vvra 
iraXiv cmodvr)(TKQVTa ds yr\v Karrjei. kcu rdXXa re 

5 iravra LieTefiaXXev, caTOLLLfiovjieva kcu ^vvolkoXov- p. 27* 
dovvra tcd tov ttclvtos 7ra0r]paTi, kcu 8rj kcu to ttjs 
Kvqtreais kcu yevvifaeco^ kcll rpo(j)r]9 uljirjua avveLirero 
tols iracriv vtt dvdyKiqs. ov yap i$ji}p er iv yrj 81 
erepcov avvicrravTcov (JjvecrOai tcoov, dXXd Kadairtp 

ioTco Kocrucp 7rpocreT6TaKTO avTOKparopa elvat 7-779 avrov 
Tropela?, ovtco 8rj Kara, ravrd koli tois uepecnv avrols 
8l avrcov, Ka0 J ocrov oiov r rjv, (pveiv re Ka\ yevvav 
/cat rpecpeLU TrpoazraTTeTO virb tyjs opLOia? dycoyrjs. 
ov 8e ei>€Ka 6 Xoyos cop/mrjKt iras, eV avrco vvv iafxev b 



I . miva. — Tore] " Made an 
opposite inversion of the phe- 
nomena." 

to. pev yap — Karrjei] Those 

who according to the previous 
order had risen from earth in 
full maturity, and had passed 
through the stages of youth 
and childhood, and were on 
the point of disappearing from 
the earth, returned to child- 
hood, youth, and manhood ; 
while those who had been 
lately born, and were there- 
fore in full maturity, instead 
of becoming more youthful, 
passed into old age and died 
and went below the ground — 
so preparing the soil for the 
next crop of earth-born men. 

3. veoyevrj] It is to be re- 
membered that they are al- 
ready full-grown. 

7roXta (pvvra ] " Having 
grown grey." The aorist re- 



tains the temporal significa- 
tion. 

6. to — piprjpa] I. e. to ttjs 

Tpocprjs pepiprjpevov crvveinfTO. 

81 eTepoov o~vvio~Ta.vTa>v] DC. 6ca>v. 

Cf. Tim. 43 a; Protag. 320 d. 

9. <pvta6ai £a>ov] Bodl. A LEY 
£acov. 

I 3. vnb Tr/s opoias dyeoyfjs] By 
a similar entrainement, by an 
eddy from the same current. 
Cf. Phsedr. 238 c : viKrjcracra 
ayayfj. Rep. 10,604 b: ivavrias 
8e dycoyrjs yiyvopevr/s iv tu dv- 

6p(OTvco. As the world is moved, 
so human beings are brought 
together, by destiny and innate 
desire (elpappevrj kcu crvpcpvTos 
eTTiBvpia) : ov yecoperpucals aX\' 
epaTiKals dvaynais. (Rep. 5> 

458 d.) 

14. eV avrcp — ecrpev] Cf. Rep. 
5, 473 C : eV avTO (v. 1. avrco) 
8tj eipi 6 tco peylcTTCo 7rpoo-eiKci£o- 
pev Kvpari. lb. 7? 53 2 c • e '' ^, 



nOAITIKOS. 



GO 



274. rj8rj. irepl pev yap tcou aXXwv Orjplcou 7roXXa av kgu 
fiaKpa Si€^€\0€iv yiyvoiro, i£ (hv eKaara kou 8l as 
airlas p-erafiefiXyKe' irepl 8e dvOpcoTrcou fipayyrepa 
kcu fxaXXov TTpoarjKOVTa. ti)s yap tov KdKTr)fievov 
Kal vepLOvros rjpids 8alp.ovos aTrepr/puoOevTes eVt/ue- 5 
Ae/ay, rcof iroXXcov av drjpicov, ocra ^aXeTra tols (f)v- 
a€L9 rjv, airaypL(£)6evT(£>v, avrol 8e acrOevels avOpaiiroi 
c Kal dcpvXaKTOL yeyovores, 8ii]p7rd{pi>To vir avroov, Kal 
er apxiyavoi Kal arzyyoi Kara, tov? 7rp(OTovs rjcrav 
Xpovovs, are rrjs p.ev avTopbaTij? rpcxfirj? eVnAeAot- 10 
irvias, TropL^eaOat Se ovk eTTKJTapLevoi ttco Sia to 
p.r\8ep.iav avrov? ^peiav irporepov avayKa^iv. €K 
tovtcdv iravTcov ev peyaXats diro plats fjaav. 06 ev <5/? 
rd irdXai Xe\6evTa irapd decov 8a>pa rjplv 8e8ooprjTaL 
fier dvayKaias 8i8a\rjs Kal 7rai8evaeo39, irvp p.ev 15 
irapa Hpop.r)6em', Teyyai 8e 7rap' 'HfpalaTOV Kal ttjs 



tlio world 
was self- 
impelled, 
bo tin.- races 
of animals 
were left to 
propagate 
themselves. 
And men, 
being de- 
serted by 
their Di- 
vine Shep- 
herd, were 
torn by the 
now savage 
beasts, 
while the 
earth no 
longergave 
them spon- 
taneous 
sustenance. 
Whence 
the gods, 
who still ho- 
vered near, 
gave them 
fire, mecha- 
nical arts, 
the vine, 



avrco yiyverai tco tov votjtov re- 

A«.' Soph. (Ed. Eex. 11 68 : 

Trpbs avroi y elpl ro> 8eiva> ~kiya.v. 

6. av] Used here almost as 
a conjunction. 

xaKeTra ] The opposite of 
tractable : fierce and unman- 
ageable. Cf. Rep. 6, 493 b, 
500 a; bis. Legg. 11, 922 b, 
950 b.^ 

7. doSevels — Kal d(pv\aKTOi] 
The myth at this point touches 
closely on that of Protagoras. 

Prot. 3 2 1 C : tov 8e avOpunrov 
yvpvov re Kal avvTrobrjrov Kal 
ao-rpcoTOv Kal cionXov. The whole 
passage, giving an account of 
the origin of the arts of life, 
should be carefully compared 
with this. 

II. 8ia to pr]8eplav — dvay- 

Ka^eiv\ " Because no previous 
necessity had driven them to 



invention." Cf. Theset. 149 c : 

17 dvOpayrrLvrj (pvais do-QevecrTepa 77 
\afielv Teyvr}v cov av g aneipos. 

14. to. iraKai \e)(6£vTa\ Still 
more of the existing fragments 
of mythology are incorpoi'ated 
into the Great Myth. 

15. peT dvayKaias SiSa^y] 

The Deity " left not himself 
without witness." The parts 
of the Universe were left to 
guide themselves as far as was 
possible (els hvvap.iv, supr. 273 
a) ; but in their extreme need, 
such Divine instruction as they 
could not do without (dvayKaias) 
was still afforded them. 

16. Kal ttjs o-vvrexvov] Cf. 

Prot. 321 e : t6 ttjs 'Adrjvds Kal 

H<fiaio~Tov o'lKrjpa to kolvov, ev a> 
eCpiXoTexvelrrjv. Legg. II, 92 1 
d : 'HcpaiaTOV Kal \6rjvds lepov 
to tcov 8r)p.iovpyav yevos, ol tov 



70 



IIAATQNOS 



the olive, 
the sustain- 
ing corn, 
accompa- 
nied with 
such in- 
struction 
as was 
indispen- 
sable : and 
thereafter 
left them to 
themselves. 
Such is the 
fable which 
we must 
now apply. 



The myth 
has brought 
to lisjht the 



avvTtyvov, cnrzpiiaTa hi av koll (jwra irap dXXwv' p. 27<f ! 
/cat TravO' (macro, top dvOpcoinvov (3iov auyKare- 
(TKevocKev, €K tovtojv yeyovev, kireihii to p.ev €K Oecov, 
oirep ippyflr) vvv 8rj, rrj? eVt/iieAe/a? e7reXnrev dvOpco- 
5 7TOV9, 8l eavTcov 8e edet rrju re Siaycoyrjv kcu ttjv 
empcXeiav ccvtovs avTcov ^X eLV Ka @ a7r€ P 0A09 o 
Koa/j.O'i, ch £vli\xillovllc-voi kcu fjvveiroLLt-voL tov de\ 
yjpovov vvv llIv ovtco, rore Se Ikc-ivcos ^ixev re kcu 

(fivOLLtQa. KCU TO fX€V $7} TOV LivOoV TfAo? €)(€TC0, C 

lo^prjaLLiov 81 olvtov TroirjcroLieOa irpos to KctTiSeiv 
oaov rj/xapTOiiev d7ro(pi]vaLi€voL tov (3cictiXikov re /cat 
ttoXltlkov Iv tco irpocrOe Xoyco. 

NE. 212. UcOS OVV KCU TTOCTOV CtLidpTT] fX(l (f)fj? dvCU 

yeyovb? rj/xiv ; 
15 HE. Tfj fxev l3pa)(VT€pov, ttj 8e LidXa yevvcuov 

KCU TToXXcp LLtltpV KCU irXtOV ?) TOT€. 



fiiov r/plv ^vyKarea-KevaKaat re- 

1. nap aWav ] Denieter 
aud Cora, Triptolemus, Diony- 
sus. Cf. Legg. 7, 782 b. 

3. to — £k 6ea>v — rrjs inipe- 
\das\ Double constr. with the 
article, ttjs imp. being added 
epexegetically. Cf. supr. 271 
e : to Tu>v dvBpinrov \e\6ev av- 
TOfxaTov irepl /3iou. 

7. co t-vp.pip.ovp.evoi koX £vv(- 
Tropevoi] Cf. supr. 2 7 3 e : dno- 

pipovpcva kcu £vva.Ko\ov8ovvTa — 

nip-qpa o-vveiTreTo. gvp. appears 
to be added by a sort of at- 
traction from §war., by which 
the dative is in the first in- 
stance governed. It may per- 
haps occur to the student to 
render tjvpp-ipovpevoi " helping 
the Universe to imitate (the 



movement of the Divine 
Hand):" comparing supr. 273 

a : rrjv tov drjpiovpyov Kal ira- 
Tpos diropvrjpovevcov 8i8axr)v els 

dvvapiv, and infra 293 e, 297 c. 
And this sense would not be 
unsuitable to this expression 
taken singly, and to to tijs — 
rpocprjs plp.rjpa. But these words 
cannot be interpreted apart 
from the previous phrase, peTe- 

@a\\ev dnopipovpeva kcu £vvaKo- 
XovdovvTa tco tov navTos TraOi-jpaTi., 
which can only be rendered in 
one way. 

9. reXos ex*'™] Cf. Phsedo 
77 c; Legg. 4, 717 e. 

II. oaov fjpdpTopev] Cf. 268 
b, C : 7rws av ovv rjplv 6 Xoyos 
6p6bs (pavelTai Kal d<epaios 6 ntpl 
tov fiaaikeas k.t.X. 

15. Tfj pev f$paxvTcpov\ " Our 



nOAITIKOS. 



71 



274. NE. 20. riw? ; 

SE. 'On [lev epcoTconevoi rbv e'/c 7779 vvv Trept- 

(popa? kcll yevecreco? fiaaikea koll ttoXltlkov tov 4k 

ttJ9 kvavrlas irepioftov iroLfxeva 7-779 Tore avOpooirlvr)? 
2 75- ayeA^y eiiropLev, kcll ravra Oeov avri Ovtjtov, ravTr]S 

fiev irafiiroXv iraprjveyOrjiiev otl 8e ^Vfjordarj^ ttj? 

7r6\€(o? apxovra aurbv aTrecprjvapev, ovriva hi rpoirov 



mistake in one way is less im- 
portant" (than in another of 
which we are now to speak 

not /3p. rf Tore). 

(15.) paka yevvolov] "We have 

erred on a grand scale, and 
our error is much more serious 
and important than I then af- 
firmed it to be." Cf. Phpedr. 
2 57 e: vvxvov 8iapapTaveis. yev- 
valos is often used with reference 
to size, cf. Rep. 2, 372 b. Our 
object was not only to shew 
that the king has many rivals 
amongst his flock, but also to 
see an image of the " king in 
his beauty," and to establish 
his sole authority above other 
artists. The image is found, 
however, to transcend the re- 
ality of the office in the present 
order of the world, in which 
the statesmen are not Gods 
but men, whose natures and 
training are not far different 
from those whom they seek to 
rule. 

(16.) Tore] Sc. e'qbrjv. In 

speaking of the king as the 
herdsman of men we erred in 
two ways — first, while truly as- 
serting that his rule extended 
to the whole state, we did not 
sufficiently define the man- 
ner of his rule ; so that our 
definition included some func- 
tions which belong to other 



craftsmen : and secondly, which 
is of more importance, we con- 
fused the Statesman of this 
present cycle with the Divine 
shepherd of the golden age. 

2. tov in Tijs vvv — -yeveaeus 
fiao-iXea] Cf. Legg. 5, 7 40 a, 
where the community of goods 

is Said to be pel^ov f) mru ttjv 
vvv ye'vecriv ku\ rpo<pT)v Kai Tiai- 
8evo-iv. lb. 9, 853 C : eWSj? 8e 
ov, KaQcnrep 01 naXaiol vopo6eTai 
6ewv Traurl vopo6eTovp.evoi rois 
r/pooo'iv, cos 6 vvv Xoyos, avToi t' 
eK decov ovres aWois re e< roiov- 
ra>v yeyovoaiv evofinderovv, dXX' 
dvdpamoi re Ka\ a\v6pccma>v o-irep- 
p.ao~i vopoderovpev Ta vvv, dvep.e- 
ar/Tov 8rj (poBe'iadai k.t.X. 

The same thought is present 
also in Legg. 10, 906 : tos twv 

(pvXaKcov \j/vxas kvvcov 77 Tas TOiv 

vop.ea>v rj — Tas rav TvavTcmao-iv 
aKpoTCLTav 8eanoTa>v. Compare 
also Parm. 134 d : Ovkovv el 

Ttapa rw 6eu> avTrj eo~Tiv rj aKpiffe- 
o-TaTr) 8ecnroTela Kai avrrj f/ aKpi- 
fieo-Ta.Tr) eTTio-TTjpr] k.t.X. Al'ist. 
Pol. III. 8 : aianrep deov ev av- 
Bptoirois eiKOS eivat tov toiovtov 
(t6v 8ia(pepovTa kut dperijs vnep- 
(3o\r]v). 

6. ■napr\vex& r \P- fV ] " Went 
astray." Cf. Phileb. 60 d : el 8e 
ye TrapT]vex6r]p,ev tl Tore, vvv 
oariaovv eiravaKaj3cov opdoTepov 
elndra. 



real grava- 

lii'-n of ' 

error. 

Our defini- 
tion of tin.- 
ruler of bhe 
statu is not 
merely in- 
adequate, 
as we fear- 
ed, but, 
what is 
more se- 
rious, we 



72 



IIAATQNOS 



haw i-i ni- 
Rued bhe 
modern 
Statesman 
with the 
Divine 
Shepherd. 



The myth 
was intro- 
duced that 
we might 
see in a 
clearer 
light the 
image of 
the kin sr. 



ov 8i€i7ropev, TavTY] 8e av to pev Xe^Bev d.Xr)6e?, ov p. 27 
p.i)v oXov ye ov8e aaqjes epprjdr/, 81b kou ftpayvTepov 
7) kclt eKelvo rjpapTrjKapev. 

NE. 20. 'AXrjOij. 
5 HE. Aei. to'lvvv tov Tpowov, 6)$ eotKe, 8ioplaavTa9 
T V? ®-p\ri9 tt}9 TroXecos 1 ovtco TeXetos tov ttoXitlkov 
rjp.lv eiprjcrOou 7rpooSoKav. 

NE. 20. KaXw. 

HE. Aia Tama pr/v kou tov pvOov 7rapeOepe0a, b 

iotva evSelljaiTO 7repl ty)$ dyeXaiOTpoffilas pr) povov a>5 

TfdvTes avTrj? dpi(pLO~(3r/T0vo~L tco fyrovpe'vcp tol vvv, 

dXXa KotKelvov clvtov ivapyeaTepov 'Idoipev, ov irpocr- 

rjKei, povov kolto. to 7rapd8eLypLa 7roip.evcov re kou 

fioVKoXcOV TTJS dv0pu>7TLVr/9 eTTipeXeiaV €)(OVTa Tpo<prj?, 

15TOVTOV povov d^icodr/vou tov it poo prjpaTOS '. 
NE. 20. 'Op0m. 
HE. Olpai 81 y\ co *2coKpaT6?, tovto pev ert 



1. Tairrj 8e av] 8e repeated 
in the apodosis. 

to piv — ahrjdes] This was 
said previously, p. 268 c: oi 

pevroi aTreipyacrpevoi ye eipev ttco 
81 aKpifteias k.t.X. 

6. rrjs apxijs ttjs 7rdXews] "Of 

his rule over the city." In 
what follows, it is shewn that, 
although distinguished from 
others, his function is still su- 
preme. 

9. 7rapede'peda] "Introduced." 
Cf. Phileb. 46 b: oi prju 3>iAi7/3ov 

ye evena napedeprjv tov \6yov. 

Phsedo 65 e : prjTe tt)v oyj/iv 

napadepevos ev tco diavoelcrdai. 

1 0. iva ev8ei£aiT0 — pr) povov 

dkX 'iSoipev] The structure of 
the sentence is slightly altered 
by the change of subject. 



II. tco (rjTOvpevco Tavvv\ I.e. 

tco ttoXitikco. For a similar 
formal allusion to the subject 
of inquiry, cf. Soph. 223 c : oi 
yap ti cpavXrjs peToypv ecTTt Te'x vr }'> 
to vvv £rjTovpevov, aXX' ev pa\a 
iroiKiXr]?. Phileb. 5 b : i-a vvv 

7toXXcikis Xeyopeva. Cf. Gorg. 
451 e : ovBev tvco aacpes. Tim. 
49 a : e'iprjTai pev TciXrjdes, Set §' 
ivapyeaTepov elnelv ivep\avT0v. 
I 2. ov Tvpoo-rjiceL, povov — Trpocr- 

prjparos] " To whom it belongs, 
having, in accordance with our 
image, alone of shepherds and 
herdsmen the care of human 
nurture, alone to be thought 
worthy of this title." The 
order of the words is pecu- 
liar, as is the case frequently 
throughout these dialogues. 



nOMTIKOS. 



73 



175. fAeltpv 7) Kara fiacriXea dvat to ayj]p.a to tov Oeiov 

C l>O/UL€C0$, TOVS 5' iu6a8e VVV OVTCLS TToXlTLKOVS TOL9 
dp)(Ofl€l>OL9 OflOlOV? T€ elvOLL fiaXKoV TToXv TCL9 (f)Va€L9 

Kal 7rapa7r\r]oriaiTepoi> 7rai8eia? peTeiXrjtyevaL koll 

TpO(f)T)S. 5 

NE. 20. I\a.VT(OS 7T0V. 

aE. Ztr)TT)T€OL ye pnqv ov8ev av elrjcrav ovO* 
fjTTOv ovt€ paXXov, et@' ovtco? eiT eKelvco? 7re<fiv- 
Kao~iv. 

NE. 212. rTws* yap ov ; 10 

aE. TrjSe Si] ttclXlv iiraveXOcofiev. i~jv yap edjapev 

avT€7riTaKTLKT}v pev dvat \re-yyrjv] hri {fi)oi?, ov \xr\v 

d 18 la ye dXXa /toiisr} ttju eiripLeXetav e^ovaav, koi 

TrpoaehropLev 8rj TOTe evOvs dyeXaioTpocpiKrji', — p.e- 

[xvr\crai yap ; 15 

NE. 2Q. Nat. 

S"E. TavT7]9 Toivvv irrj 8i7]pLapTavopL€is. tov yap 
ttoXltlkov ovdapov crvveXafiopev ov8' dtvopidcrapLev, 
dXX rjpas eXa&e KaTa tyjv bvopcacriav ifccpvycav. 

NE. 20. Urn ; 

HE. Tov tol9 dyeXas eicdcrTas Tpe(f)etu tol? fieu 
aXXois 7rov 7ra.cn pArecTTi vopevcn, tco ttoXltlkco 8e 



But the 
Form that 
we have 

seen is 
higher than 

tin: states- 
men of the 
earth, who 
are but 



On retra- 
cing our 
steps, we 
find that 
we gave 
too narrow 
a designa- 
tion to the 
art which 
is sove- 
reign over 
living crea- 
tures. 

An " art of 
nurture" 
does not 
include the 
Statesman 
at all, 
though the 
name ap- 
plies to all 
other 
herdsmen. 



3. fiaXXop ttoXv] So all the 
MSS. except Ven. 3., which, 
with the old editions, lias noXv 
fiSXkov. The inversion is per- 
fectly in keeping with the ge- 
neral style. For rfjs, supra, most 
MSS. have tov. And the Bodl. 

has eVi/xeXet'ay, with All. 

7. Zr)rr]T€oi — Tve<$>vitao-iv\ Ac- 
cording to the principle laid 
down in Soph. 227 b, and re- 
peated supr. 266 d, that de 
minimis ceque ac de maximis 



curat scientia. 

1 1 . iiraveXdajfiev] " Let us re- 
trace our steps." 

14. aye\aioTpo(fiiKr]V ] Supr. 

262 e. 

17. Tavrrjs — diTj/jLapravoiJiev] 

" Our error lay somewhere in 
this." The genitive is governed 
by Try, and not by the verb. 

19. Kara rr]v ovonacr'iav~\ The 

verbal noun ovop.. occurs here 
for the first time in Greek 
literature. 



74 



nAATQNOS 



WY.sl.nl.ld 

have spo- 
ken more 

generally 

of an art 

of tending. 



And then 
by follow- 
ing the 
same series 
of divisions 
we before 
employed, 



ov fA6T0i> eirrjveyKCLfxev Tovvopa, 8eov tcov kolvcov e?r- p. 27 
eveyKtiv tl ^vpnraaiv. e 

NE. 212. ' A\i]0rj Xeyet?, eiirep tTvyyave ye ov. 

HE. Y\m <5' ovk rjv to ye Bepcmeveiv ttov ttolctl 
skolvov, fir)$ev SioptaOelo-qs rpofprj? /J.r)8e twos aXhr)<s 
it pay paTeias ; aAA' rf Tiva ayeAaiOKOpuKrjv 77 depa- 
TrevTLKrju rj /cat Tiva e7Ttp.eXrjTLK^v auTyv ovop.ao~aaiv, 
ojs KCLTa irdvTcov, e^ijv TrepLKaAvitTtLV /cat tov ttoXl- 
tlkov a/za toIs aAAots", e7rei8r) [8eiv\ tout iarjpaivev 
106 \oyo<s. 

NE. 212. 'Opdm. aAA' 77 /xera tovto 8ialpeo-i? 
av Tiva Tpoirov kyiyver dv ; p. 27 

HE. Kara raura kolO* direp epnrpocrOev Siypov- 
fieOa tyjv ayeAcuoTpoffiiKrjv ne^ols T€ /cat awTr/cri, /cat 

i5afllKTOl? T€ KOU OLKepOLTOL?, TOW OUTOLS OLV TTOV TOVTOL9 

dioupovpLevoL kou ttjv dyeXaiOKOpUKrjv ttjv re vvv kol 



2. gvpiraa-iv] Governed by 

KOtVQiV. 

3. 01/] SC. KOLVOV TL. 

4. rjv — lf£r\v — ecrrffiaivev] The 
imperfect is used because we 
are imagining what might have 
been done. 

6. depanevTiKrjv iTriu.e\T]TiKT]v] 

The prefix dyeXaio- is to be 
resumed in thought with each 
of these words. 

8. coy Kara TravTav\ " For the 

general expression" — " for the 
generic name." 

9. \pfiv\ tovto\ Sc. noielv. 

8eh om. Bodl. An. 

12. eyiyver] Bodl. eyylyver. 

13. Kara ravra toIs avrols] 

Note the resumption. 

Ig. afiiKTOis re Koi dxepdrois] 

Thus the twofold distinction is 
resumed. Supr. 265 d. 

toIs airots — iv rco Xdyco] 



" Dividing by means of these 
same differences the care of 
herds also, we should have 
comprehended in the terms of 
our definition alike the present 

kingship (ttjv vvv ftacriXeiav) and 

the royal dignity which existed 
in the time of Kronos." Al- 
though the former term ex- 
cluded one of these, that now 
employed includes them both. 

I 6. dye\aiOKoiJ.iKT)V -rjs] A Va- 
rious reading in both places is 
-vofXLK-. The word dyeXaioKOfiiKrj 

is of course invented for the 
occasion. dye\aioic6fios would 
be derived, like jWoko/xos (v. 
supr. 261 d), from Kopelv or ko- 
uLCeiv, in the sense of " tend- 
ing." 

" If the name had been thus 
expressed under the form of 
tendance, we clearly should not 



nOAITIKOS. 



75 



have in- 
cluded the 
Divine and 
human 

Hovereigns 
under one 
form. 



ij6. tyjv eirl Kpovov (3ao-iXelav 7repieiXt](f)6Tes dv rjpev we bould 
o/jloicos 1 ev tco Xoyco. 

NE. 212. <\>aiveTaC &tco 8e av rl to fieTa tovto ; 
aE. ArjXov otl XeyOevTos ovtco tov ttjs dyeXaio- 

b K0/JLIK7]? OVOfJLaTO? OVK OCV TCOT iyeveO' Tj/MV TO TWOS 5 

dfMpiafirjTe'LV cos oi)8 eiTineXeia to irapdirav eaTiv, 
coawep tot€ Sikglicos 7]/JL(pLcr(3r}Tr)0r) /irjSe/iiav dvai 
Te^yrjv ev r]plv d^lav tovtov tov OpeirTiKOv rrpocr- 
prmoLTOs' el 5' ovv tls elr], rroXXols upoTepov a\)Tr}<s 
kcu p.aXXov 7rpocn]K€iv rf tlvl tcov fiacriXeaiv. i 

NE. 20. 'Op6m. 

HE. 'YiirLfieXeia be ye avOpwirivqs (TVfLlrdcrrjs kol- 
vcovia? ovSe/ucia av edeXrjaetev eTepa fiaXXov /ecu 
^TrpoTepa* Trjs fiaaiXiKris (fiavai kcu /cara TrdvTtov 
c dvOptoircov apxv* 3vai riyyi). i 

NE. 20. Aeyeiy 6p6m. 

HE. Mera Tama 8e ye, to HcoKpaTe?, dp evvo- 
odfiev otl 7rpo? avTco 8rj tco TeXei av\ybv av dnjfiap- 
TaveTO ; 



have been troubled with the 
objection that there was no 
sort of care of men, as it was 
then fairly objected that we 
had no art amongst us which 
merited this attribute of nur- 
ture, and, moreover, if there 
was, there were many who 
might claim a share in such 
an art more easily than a 
king." 

5. iyeved'] So the Bodleian 
as well as the Coislinian MS. 

12. 'EiripeXeia be ye Texvrj\ 

MSS. TTpaoTepa : in the Bodl. 
without any accent. " But 
there is none" (i. e. no art : 
rexvrj is understood from what 
precedes and follows) " which 



rather and sooner than king- 
craft, would claim to be a 
mode of tendance of human 
society as a whole, and to be 
an art of sovereignty over- 
taking all men." irporepa for 
irpaore'pa would be almost re- 
quired by the context (npoTepov 
— kol (j.aXKov, supr.) even if any 
good meaning could be given 
to the latter word. Stallbaum 
makes the last word, re'xvrj, the 
subject, and joins empe'Xeta dp- 
\rjs — but eVt/xe'Aeia and dp\r] are 
co-ordinate, and not interde- 
pendent. 

1 8. irpos avTco — t<b reXei] The 

former error has been detected 
in an early stage of the process 

L 2 



76 



nAATONOS 



i!i 



error of 

i o divide 
this. 



NE. 20. To iroiov ; p. 27 

SE. To8e, tos^ ap el kou 8Levorjdrjp.ev o tl p.a- 
\iara rrjs 8i7ro8os dye'Xrj? elvai riva OpeiTTLKrjv 
T<zyv~f)v, ovhev tl p.aXXov rjfxas e'dei fiacriXiK-qv av- 
ti-jv evOvs koll TroKiTiKrjv a>9 dTTOTereXeo'fievrjv irpocr- 
ayopeveLv. 

NE. SO. Tl mv ; 

SE. \\pu)Tov pjev, o ^Aeyo/jLev*, rovvop.a fxera- 
crKevcoprjaacrOai, 7rpb? rrju eirLp.eXeLav pLaXXov irpoa- d 
ayayovra? rj ttjv rpo(])rji>, eirecra ravTr/v refiveW ov 
yap cr/jLiKpas av eyoi Tfxrjcrei? en. 

NE. 20. IW; 



of division : that now to be 
named is an omission with 
which we were chargeable at 
the close. Supr. 267 c. 

(18.) crv^vov 8irjpaprdveT0 ] 

"We erred largely." Cf. Phsedr. 

257 c : wxybv 8iapaprdvei?. 

2. ToSe — 7rpocrayop€veiv ] 

" This was our mistake, that it 
might be said (apa) that how- 
ever clear we were as to the 
existence of a nurturing art, 
we were not therefore justified 
in at once calling this by the 
names of ' kingcraft' and 'state- 
craft,' as if perfectly defined." 

7. Ti firjv ;] Sc. ?8« ; " Why, 
what ought we to have done 1" 
See note on « prjp ; supr. 

258 b. 

8. UpcoTOv pev o *Xeyopev*] 
Bodl. All. eXeyopev : cett. o eXey- 
opev. Cf. Rep. 3, 402 C : ap' 
ovv, o Xeyw, irpbs 8ea>v, ovtcos 

ov8e povcFLKoi rrpoTepov eo~6pe6a . 

lb. 5; 464 C : dp' ovv o&x, oirep 
\eyoa, rd re 7rp6o~8ev elprjpeva /cat 
rd vvv Xeyopeva en pdXXov dnep- 
yd^erai airovs akq6ivovs (pv- 



Xanas ; Legg. 3, 68 1 b : els rovs 
iraihas cmorvTvovpevovs Kal naidoov 
Traidas, b Xiyopev, tftcetv k.t.X. 

Compare Theset. 188 c : 6' fy- 
rovpev : where Bodl. An. give 
e{j)Todfiev. 

p.eTao~Kevcopr]0-ao-dai] Sc. e8ei. 

" We ought first, as we are 
now saying, to have remo- 
delled the name." The word 
is ana^ Xeyopevov, and it is a 
little difficult to catch the exact 
shade of association which sug- 
gested it. The literal meaniug 
is " to rearrange furniture :" 
and the word is perhaps chosen 
because this step is prepara- 
tory to the real business in 
hand, since names are the fur- 
niture or utensils (o-Kevrj) of 
thought. Cf. Rep. 7, 540 e : 81a- 

crKevcopr]o~ovTat. ttjv eavraiv itoXiv. 

9. enipeXeiav] The word is 
used technically by Aristotle, 

Pol. VII. 14 '. o~xe86v 8r/ iravra 
ravra avpfiaivei Kara plav inipe- 
Xeiav. 

10. TavTT)v] Sc. ttjv ovtco pera- 
vopao~pevr]v (^e7ripeXrjTi.Krjv) re^vrjv. 



nOAITIKOS. 



77 



jff6. HE. 'Hi re roy ^etof eu> 7rof 8ieiX6p.e6a vop.ea 

XCt>/3i? KOa TOi/ avOpWTTLVOV eiT ip.eXr\Tr\V . 
NE. SO. 'O/D&Sff. 

HE. Av0i<? Se ye ttjv a.7rovep.rj6elaav e7rip.eArjTiKr)v 
8iXa rep.veiv avayKcuov rjv. 1 

NE. 212. T/w ; 

AE. Tcp (SlOLLGi T€ KCU 6KOVCTIG). 

NE. 20. T/ftJ; 

HE. Kcet ravTT} irov to irporepov apaprdvovTes 
e evrjOearepa tov deovro? eh tolvtov fiacriXea kcu tv- 
pavvov Ijvve'Oepev, avopoioTarovs ovtols avrovs re kcu 
tov rr\<s apyfjs eKarepov rpoirov. 

NE. 20. 'AAifflJ. 

HE. NOj> 8e ye ttolXlv eTra.vop6ovp.evoi, KaOdirep 
ehrov, ttjv av0pa>7rlvr)v e7rip.eAr)TiKr)v 8t)(a Sicupcop-eOa, 1 
TW fiialcp T€ /ecu eKOvaiw ; 

NE. 20. I1gu>i> /zeV ovv. 

HE. Kcu T?)y /xeV ye irov tcov fiialcov TvpavviKrjv, 
tyjv 8e eKovaiov kcu eKovaicov SlttoSoov dyeAcuoKopuKrjv 



We should 
have dis- 
tinguished; 

first, the 

Divine 

Shepherd 

from the 
human 
ruler, and 
then, the 
king of a 
willing 
people from 
the tyrant 
ofunwilling 
subjects, 
than which 
no differ- 
1 ence can be 
greater. 



I. r Hi re— ASffa fie ye] The 

correspondence of clauses is 
not strictly preserved. 

4. airove^r]6ii(Tav\ I. e. " As- 
signed to the human ruler." 
The word is partly suggested 
by a false echo from vopea. 

6. Tivi eKova-iui] " By what 

mark of distinction 1 That be- 
tween the compulsory and the 
voluntary." Cf. 265 d : ra> 
o-ykttq) kcu — po>vv\i, alib. 

IO. evr)8i<TTepa tov fieowos] 

" With undesirable simplicity:" 
a simplicity that might cost 
us dear. Cf. Rep. 3, 409 a : 

evrjSels — Kal eve^aTraTrjTOi vwo 
tcov ddtKcov. lb. IO, 598 d. 



1 1 . avrovs re kcu tov — Tponov] 
" Most unlike in themselves, 
as also the mode of either's 
government is most unlike." 
Cf. Symp. 221 d : ohs — ovtoo-1 
yeyove ttjv droTriav avdpamos, Kal 
avTos Kai ol \6yoi avTov. 

15. dv6pa>nlvT]u fTTipeXrjTiKrjv] 

" The human art of superin- 
tendence" as distinguished from 
the Divine. 

18. ttjv tcov fiiaicov] " The 

superintendence of the violent." 
The genitives fiiatcov and €kov- 
o-icov are different, the former 
pointing to the rulers, the latter 
to the persons ruled. 

1 9. 7-171/ fie — £aa>v] "That tend- 



78 



nAATONOS 



But this 
is not all. 
Even with 
the cum- 
brous help 
of our 
" great fa- 
ble" we 
have only 
obtained 
a shadowy 
outline of 
our subject 



(johidp 7rpoa€i7rui>Te? noXiTiKrjv, tov eypvTa av Teyvi-jV p« i\ 
TavTrjv kou eiripeXetav ovtois ovtol fiacriXea kou ttoXl- 

TLKOV U7TO(f)aLl'(Of.l€0a \ 

NE. 20. Kai Kivdvvevei ye, do £eve, reAeW p. 2; 

sav rjixlv ovtco? e\eiv 1) irep\ tov ttoXltlkov oltto- 
Seitjis. 

HE. KaAeoy av, co ^coKpare?, rjpiv eyou. Set 8e 
firj ao\ fiovcp Tama, dXXa KapLoi fxera aov Koivfj 
ijvvooKelv. vvv 8e Kara ye ttjv e/JLi)v ovtto) (fyaiveraL 

lorekeov 6 fiaaiXevs r\plv a\y)pa eyeiv, aXXa KaOairep 
avSpiavTonoio), irapa KOLLpov ev'toTe CT7rev8ovTes TrXelco 
kou p.el£cQ rod SeovTOs eKacrTa twv epycov €7re/x/3aAAo- 
ixevoi fipadvvovcri, kou vvv rjfiei?, tva 8r) 7rpb? Top b 
Taxy kou fxeyaXoTrpeiru)? SrjXaHJoupev to ttjs 1 €/x- 

ibTrpoaOev ap.apTr\pa Sie^odov, tw fiaaiXel vofilcravTe? 



ance of animals in herds whose 
principle is voluntary and 
whose subjects are bipeds hav- 
ing free will." 

8. Koivrf] Cf. supr. 260 b : 

tovtov toivvv (tov OfXOVOe'lv) p.1- 
Xpmep av avToi Koivcova>p.ev, eariov 
to. ye rav ciXXoov 8o{-dvpaTa ^m- 
peiv. 258 c : tovto fjht) aov, 
oifxai, to epyov, S £eve, «XX' ovk 
etiov yiyverai. 3. Aei ye iir)v — 
avTo eivai Kai aov. 

9. Kara ye tt)v ep.r)v\ Cf. 

Phileb. 41 b. 

1 1 . ir\eia> <a\ peifa is governed 
by enenP., and does not agree 

with eKao-ra tcdv epyuv, which is 

governed by (SpaSuvovcri. 

12. enao-Ta to>v epyoiv] Badh. 

conj. to epyep. But there is no 
need of change if the words 
are taken alternately, as often 
in these dialogues, and Bpadw. 
be transitive : — Bpahvvovo-iv e<- 



acrra twv epyonv entfiBaWofievoi 
pelfa Kai nXeco Toil deovros. If 

this is thought harsh, I should 
prefer to read eKao-rois. 

inepfiaWoixevoi ] " Throw- 
ing in additional material." 
Cf. Tim. 51 d : ovt eirl \6yov 

firjKet. irdpepyov aK\o fj.rJK.os enep.- 

f3\r]Teov. The middle voice sig- 
nifies " into their own work." 

13. tva npos T(£ Ta^v Kai peya- 

XoTrpeTTcos] " That not only with 
speed but with magnificence." 

7rpoy tco Ta%i) SC. SijAcoo-at. npos 

ra raxei would be a more 
usual expression, but the ad- 
verb is suggested by the suc- 
ceeding adverb. 

14. to — Ste|oSov] Stallbaum 
well compares Tim. 39 d: -rrpbs 

Tr)v tt)<; hiaimvias piprfcrLV (fivo-eoos. 

lb. 506, Hipp. Maj. 300 c. 

15. ftaaiXel] Governed partly 
by wpe'neiv, partly by noielo-dai. 



nOAITIKOS. 



79 



77- irpeirtiv peydXa irapafteiy para iroLeiaOaL, Oavpasnov 
oyKOV dpd/jL€i>oi tov pvOov, ptifyvL tov 8eouTOf rji>ay- 
KdcrOrjfjLtv avTOV pepu irpoa^prjaaaOaL. Sib paKpo- 
ripav tt]v diroSeL^Lv TreTTOLrjKapev kcu itolvtws to 
pvOco re'Aos- ovk iire^efxev, aAA' aTeyyws 6 Aoyos 5 
c rjpuv wcnrep tjuoov rrjv e^codeu pev 7repiypa(f)7]v eoiKev 
iKavcios e'xew, tt\v 8e olov toi? (pappaKOis kcu rfj 
avyKpdau to>v xpuipaTcov Ivdpytiav ovk d.7reiXrj- 



1. VaVfMHTTOV OJKOV TOV flV- 

6ov\ " Taking up in the fable, 
as it were, a monstrous lump, 
we have been obliged to use 
more of it than was good for 
our purpose." The image of 
the statuary (or modeller) is 
continued. But there is also 
in oyKov dpdfievoi an association 
from the other meaning of oy- 
kov aipeiv, to assume a lofty 
vein. Cf. Soph. Aj. 129 : pijb' 

oyKov aprjs prjdev. 

2. tov (xvdov is a genitive of 
apposition or of respect. Cf. 
Protag. 329 a: 8o\ixbv kcito.- 
Ttivas tov \6yov. 

4. ndvTcos] " With all," like 
the Homeric ep,irr)s. 

6. So-nep £a>ov] " Like a pic- 
ture" of some living thing. 
The illustration passes from 
statuary to painting. 

7. rfj o~vyKpdo~ti tu>v xpa>pd- 
rav] " Harmony of colour." 
Cf. Legg. 6, 768 c: olov vepi- 

ypa(pr] tls e^coBev Trepiyeypappevr] 
to. pev e'lprjKe, to S' dnoXeiTrei 

o~x*86v. lb. d : to 8e 8\ov kcu 
duplies irepl evos re kcu irdvTcov 

TOOV KCITO. TT0\lU KCU IToXtTLKrjV 

•ndcrav 8ioiKr)aeo)v ovk eort yeve- 
o~dai aacpes, rrplv av t) 8ie't-o8os 
an clpx*j s T< * Te 8evrepa kcu to. 
p.eo~a kcu TvdvTa peprj tci eavrrjs 



dTro\aftovo-a irpbs tc\os cKpUrjTai. 
lb. 769 b : KaduTvep faypdcpoav 
ov8ev iripas e\eiv fj irpaypaTeia 

SoKCL 7tcpl eKCtCTTOV T(OV £&)&)!/, «XX' 

fj tov xp atvflp 1 dnoxpaiveiv, *j 
tl 8fj KoXovai to toiovtov ol 
£a>ypd<pa>v Trai8es } ovk civ ttotc pot 
8okc'i Travirao-Bai Kocrpovaa, wot' 
enlboaiv prjKer e'xeiv els to ko\- 
Xico Te kcu (pavepiOTepa yiyveadai 

tu yeypappeva. The question, 
How far is the requirement 
of artistic proportion appli- 
cable to philosophical dis- 
course"? is partly suggested 
here, and is fully discussed in 
the sequel. 

Plato's contempt of the mere 
artist comes out in the same 
passage (769 c): evTpipfjs — oi8a- 

p£>s yeyova ttj Toiav-rp Te'xvrj. 
A0. Kcu ov8ev ye efiXdPrjs. Com- 
pare Soph. 234. 

8. e'vdpyeiav] " Distinctness." 
Here, as in Theset. 203 b, 
the Bodl., with An., has ivepy. 
— the more familiar word. 
The word expresses the way 
in which the parts come out 
in relief (wore fao\ fipoToi) as 
the last touches are added to 
a painting. 

Aristotle uses the same 
combination of metaphors to 
describe the necessary imper- 



80 



nAATON02 



No great 
tiling can 
be made 
clear with- 
out exam- 
ples. Even 
the nature 



(f)€vm 7rco. ypa(j)r)? 8e koll (rvfiirdcrr}? yeipovpyias p. 27 

Ae'£et kcu Aoya) 8rj\ovv irav (wov iiaWov irpeireL 

tois 8vvapL€vois eweaOac tois <5' aXXois 81a )(€ipovp- 
yiwv. 

5 NE. 2Q. ToVTO p}v OpOcoS' OTTT) 8e 7)pLU OVWU) 

(pys iKavcos €iprj(r0ai f 81-jXwaov. 

S*E. XaAe7ro//, co 8aip.6i>i€, fir) Trapa8eLypa.cn xpu>- d 
fievov iKavcos ev8eLKvvo~6ai tl tcov pLeitpvcov . klv8v- 
vtvei yap r)p,wi> e/caaros- olov ovap el8cos airavra 
10 ttolvt av ttolXlv coaTrep virap dyvoeiv. 



fection of an Ethical discourse : 

duv8pcos kcu Timcp TcWrjOes e'vbe'i- 
Kvvcrdcu — to kci\£)s e\ovra rfj 
7repiypa<pjj. 

For what follows, cf. Gorg. 

450 b : tcov uev ciXKcov Ttxywv 8id 
Xeipovpyias iariv rj inurrrifirj. 

2. Xe'£ei kcu \6ycp] Xe'£is is 

introduced because Xo'yos does 
not sufficiently express a pro- 
cess. 

irap £a>av~\ And therefore 
human society, which is a liv- 
ing organism. 

3. roh hwapevois] Governed 
by brjkovv. 

tols S' aKkois 8ia %eipovp- 
yia>u] " To the other sort the 
creatures maybe shewn through 
works of art." This is a good 
illustration of Plato's manner 
of displaying both sides, even 
when a subject is mentioned 
by the way, and when one side 
only is required for his pur- 
pose. Cf. Rep. 7, 520 e, Legg. 
1, 632 d : Tois S' aWois rjplv 
ov8aucbs Icttl KciTcXpavrj. 

7. XaXe7roi/- — ti tcov uei^ovaiv] 
This remark is preparatory to 
the example of the art of weav- 
ing : which, however, is not 



introduced till p. 279, a di- 
gression on the nature of Ex- 
ample being put between. The 
thought is one of frequent 
occurrence. Phsedr. 262 c : coy 
vvv ye yjrikcos 7ra>s \eyouev, ov% 
e\ovTes lKa.vcnrapa8eiyua.Ta. Soph. 
2l8 C— e : oo~a S' av tcov ueyd- 
Xcov Set Sianoveludai — irpoTepov 
ev cruiKpols — Sen/ ueXerdv. /3ov- 
Xet drjra irepl twos tcov cpavXcov 
ueTiovTfs ireipadcouev napddeiyua 
avTo 6io~6ai tov pei(ovos ; In 
the Laws the use of Example 
is recognized as a necessary 
preliminary to discourse. 1,632 
e : ottcos S' av to 7rpS>Tov S(.e|eX- 
8couev, ireipao~6ue6a avTO irapd- 
8eiyua de'uevoi Ka\ roXXa ovtco 
8iauv8o\oyovvTes irapauvdia ttoit]- 
aacrdai Trjs 68ov. 

9. olov ovap el8cos dnavTa ] 

Compare Lys. 218 c : kiv8v- 

vevouev ovap ncnXovTTjKe'vai. 
Theset. 208 b : ovap S17 — eVXov- 
Tr)o-auev (" In sleep a king, in 
waking, no such matter"). A 
similar feeling appears in Phi- 

leb. 1 6 b : ov urjv eaTi KaXXicov 
686s otiS' av yevoiTO, r/s eyco epa- 
o-Trjs uev elui del, TroXKaKis 8e ue 
tj8t] 8iacfivyovo~a eprjuov re Ka\ 



nOAITIKOS. 



81 



277. NE. 20. IleSc* tout eiVes* ; 

S*E. Kal yuaA' aroirods eoiKa ye ev rw irapovTt 
Kivrjaas to ire pi rrj9 €7naT)]/ir)9 iraOos ev rjp.lv. 

NE. 20. f / 8rj ; 

HE. HapaSelyiLiaTOs, a> fiaKapie, av p.01 Kal ro 
TrapdbeiypLO. avrb deoe'r/Kev. 
c NE. 20. T7 ovv ; Ae'ye pLrjftev e/xov ye eVe/ca 
oVo/c^coy. 

EE. AeRreop, hretdrj Kal av ye eroipLos aKoXovOeiv. 
tovs yap irov iralBas 'ia/xev, orav dpri ypap-parcov 
epLTreipoi ylyvcovrai — 

NE. 20. To iroiov ; 

aE. Otl tgov arot^eicov eKaarov ev rals fipayy- 
Tarais Kal paarat9 tcov avXXaftcav iKavcos StaiaOd- 
vovrai, Kal raXrjOr) (frpd^eiv irepl eKelva Svvarol 
^78. yiyvovrai. 

NE. 20. Ilco? yap ov ; 



of example, 
it would 
seem, is no 
exception 

to this rule. 



We know, 
then, that 

10 children 
learn to 
read by 
being re- 
ferred from 
syllables 
which they 
cannot 
spell to 
others hav- 

J 5 ing the 
same let- 
ters, which 
they al- 
ready 
know. 



airopov Karea-Trja-ev : with which 
compare Legg. 2, 654 e : el Se 
ravd' rjfias 8ia(pvyovTa ol^rjo-eTai. 
Phsedo 89 b, C : idv uep ye rjpuv 
6 Xoyoy reXevTrjUT] kcu jjltj bvvcop.eda 
avrbv dvafiiaxracrdai. 

3. to ivepl rfjj eTrio~Tr]p.r)s ird- 
6os~\ Cf. to tjjs 86£t]s ndSos, 
Theset. 193 d. "After a strange 
fashion, it would seem, I have 
now touched upon the expe- 
l'ience of our minds in regard 
to knowledge." For the par- 
ticiple with eoiKa, cf. Xen. Hell. 
VI. 3, 10 (Passow, Lex. s. v. 
eoiKa), and for Kivrjaas, cf. infr. 

297 C : KlVTjO-aS TIS TOVTOV TOP 

\6yov. Theset. 163 a : rd 7roAXa 

Kal aTOira TavTa eKivrjo-ap-ev. 

5. IlaoaoVty/iaros] The illus- 



tration to be drawn presently 
from boys learning their let- 
ters is an example of what is 
meant by Example. 

7. fj.rj8ev dwoKvaivJ I. e. 

Don't be afraid of seeming 
tedious to me. 

9. o-v ye] So also the Bodl. 
MS., where the omission of ye, 
noted by Gaisford, is after e'p.ov 
in the previous line, perhaps 
caused by Aeye preceding. 

13. ev rats fipaxyraTais Kal 
pdo-Tais tu>v o-v\\a@5iv ] See 
the same illustration more 
fully drawn out in Eep. 3, 402 
c, where however the notion 
of syllables is not distinctly 
present ; Theset. 206 a, 207, 
208 ; Phileb. 17. 



M 



82 FIAAT0N02 

HE. Tavrd de y€ ravra eu dAAai? diJL([)iyi>oovi>re9 p« 27 
irakiv So^rj re \j/ev8ovrai koll Aoyco. 

NE. 212. Wdvv fJLtv ovv. 

EE. 'A/?' oi)f ot^ coSe pacrrov /cat KuAAtcrrov eVa- 
5 ye^ avrov? hri ra fir)7rco yiyvojaKO/ieva ; 

NE. 20. n<Sy ; 

HE. 'Ayayety Trpcorov eV i/ceiva ev oty ravra 
ravra 6p6m eS6£a£ov, dvayayovras Se riOe'vai wapa. 
ra. pLrj7T(o yiyvcocrKO/uLeva, Ka\ irapafiaXAovras evdeiK- b 
^vvvat rrjv avrrjv bp-Oiorryra koI (f)vcriv ev dfAcfrorepai? 
ovaav rah avfiirAoKah, fxe^pLTrep av iracri roi? dyvo- 
ovp.evois ra 8oija(p/j.€va dArjOcos wapariOe'/JLeva Sei^Of}, 
8ei)(6evra 8e, TrapaBeiyfxad' ovrco yiyvo/ieva, iroLrjarj 
rcov aroLyeiwv irdvrcov eKaarov ev iru-cravs rah avA- 
1 s Aafiais, ro /xev erepov toy rcov aAAcov erepov ov, ro 
8e ravrov cos ravrov del Kara ravra. eavrco irpocra- c 
yopeveaOat, 

NE. 20. Wavrdiracri \iev ovv. 

1. Tavra 8e ye ravra] Cf. rfjv avrrjv opoLorrjra = opoiov ri)s 
Theset. 207 e : orav — Qealrrjrov avrrjs Ideas Trades. 

ypd(pcov ris Brjra Ka\ ei — ypd^rrj, iv d/Mporepais rals o~vp.7r\o- 

fcal av Qeobapov imx ei p^ v yp<*- *cnts] The same letter in two 

(peiv rav koi et — ypd-ty-y, different combinations or syl- 

2. 86gr] re y\rev8ovTai Ka\ X6ya] lables (i. e. the same idea or 
The possibility of which two- law in two widely different 
fold phenomenon has been things). Cf. Soph. 253, 261. 
proved with some difficulty 1 1 . pexP L7re P — &«x#??] " Until 
this morning. Soph. 262-264. the things of which they think 

4. paarov kcu KakXicrrov] Sc. truly (supr. iv ols ravra ravra 

ear iv. 6pda>s eHd^afrv) have been shewn 

8. nde'vai] Sc. to iv ols 6p- in comparison with all the 

6a>s i86£a(ov. things which they do not 

IO. rrjv uvttjv Ofxoior-qra Ka\ know." There is a slight al- 

<fivo~tv] "The same kindred lusion to the etymology of 

form and nature." S/ioiorrjs ivapd-8eiyp.a. 

here - 6 fiolov eiSos. Cf. Phaedo 15. to pev erepov — npoaayo- 

77 a : iv&a8e — rrjv avrols dfiot- peveo-$ui] Cf. Rep. 3, 402 C ; 

orrjTa rrjs 8iaya>yrjs de\ e^ovaiv. Theset. 207 ', Soph. 259 d. 



I10AITIK02. 



83 



17%. S?E. Ovkovv tovto p.ev ikousco? avpetXy(papei>, otl 
7rapa.8e1yiJ.aT0s y eo~Ti Tore yevecrts, birorav ov rav- 
top, ev eWepo) ^Leairaafievco Soljaijopevov 6p6u>s /ecu 
crvvayOev, irepl emaTepov coy avvdp.(j)w filav aXrjOrj 
86ljai> drroTeXfj ; 

NE. SO. <J>«fWat. 

3?E. Qavp.dtpLp.ev di> ovv el tolvtov tovto rj/JLCov 77 



] [enoe it 
appears 
that Exam- 
ple comes 
into use, 
when the 
name 
element 
5 rightly dis- 
cerned in 
sometliing 
else, and 
brought 



2. onorav — aTrore'Kfj^ " When 
that which is the same in 
another separate thing, and 
which is rightly conceived, is 
brought into comparison, and 
so effects one true opinion 
about each of the two things 
which are thus regarded in 
one view." 

3. biea-TTaa/JLevcp ] Cf. Soph. 
2 53 d : fiiav I8eau 8 id noXXav, 
cvos CKacrrov Keipevov X w I'^ s j 
■navTrj 8iarerape'vr]v. 

4. avvaxOev] A technical 
word. Cf. Phaedr. 266 b : tS>v 
diaipcaecov Kcti <7vvaymya>v. 

ircp\ cadre pov a>s <rvvdp(pa — 
dnoreXf]] Have completed one 
true opinion respecting the 
several objects, and combined 
them in one conception. 

7. Qavjxdfaifiev — -dyi/oet] " Will 

it seem wonderful then if our 
mind is naturally liable to the 
same infirmity in relation to 
the first elements of things, 
and sometimes in some sub- 
jects is firm and settled about 
each element by the help of 
truth ; but at other times and 
in other subjects wanders up 
and down them all : and forms 
right opinion of some of them 
here and there amongst the 
combinations" (apjj ye ny rav 
crvyKpdcreav. cf. supr. 275 d: 
ravrrjs 717?), or, " forms right 



opinion of some things here 
and there even in the com- 
binations ;" but when they are 
transferred to the long and 
difficult (syllables) complexities 
of real life, is unable to re- 
cognize the same 1" For aw- 

io-rarai — (peperai, cf. the ac- 
count of opinion in Tim. 37 a, 
43, 44 ; and Phaedr. 265 c : 
laas pev dXrjdovs rivos ecpimrope- 
voi, rdxu- 8' av kcli dXkoae Trapa- 
(pepopevoi. lb. 262 a. 

Compare the language of 
Bacon in recommending a dif- 
ferent kind of inquiry. Ad- 
vancement of Learning (quoted 
by Mr. Ellis in General Preface 
to the Philosophical Works, 
p. 26) : " The forms of sub- 
stances, I say, as they are now 
by compounding and trans- 
planting 'multiplied, are so 
perplexed as they are not to 
be inquired ; no more than it 
were either possible or to pur- 
pose to seek in gross the forms 
of those sounds which make 
words, which by composition 
and transposition of letters are 
infinite. But on the other side 
to inquire the form of those 
sounds or voices which make 
simple letters is easily com- 
prehensible, and being known 
induceth and manifesteth the 
forms of all words which cou- 



M 2 



84 



nAATONOS 



into com- 
parison 
with the 
thin is 

creates a 
single true 
judgment 

including 
both the 
things. 
Now this 
applies 
equally to 
the ele- 
ments of 
universal 
Being : in 
contem- 
plating 
which the 
soul is like 
a child 
learning to 
read. 
Let us, 
then, 
choose an 
example, 
which will 
at once 



V /l, X ? ) ( f )V(r€l TTtp\ rd rcov irdvrcov aroiyeia ireirovOvia p- 
rore pev vn dXifQeias irep\ ev eKaarov ev tictl cjvv'l- 
ararai, rore 8e irepl airavra ev erepois av (peperai, 
KOi ra ptev avrdtv dpfj ye ttxj rcov avyKpaaecov opOco? 
5 8o^d^ei, perartOepeva 6° ei? rds rcov irpayparcov 
{laKpas koll pLi] pa.8lovs avXXafia? ravra ravra iraXiv 
dyvoel ; 

NE. 20. Kou 6avp.aarov ye ov8ev. 
SE. Ylco? '\ydp'\, co (piXe, 8vva.iT av ri? dp\o- 
io pevos diro Sotji]? \j/ev8ov9, eiri ri rrj? dXr)6eias /cat 
fiLKpov fiepos dtyiKopLevo? KrrjaaaOai (ppovrjcnv ; e 

NE. 212. 2)(e<5oi' ov8apcos. 

£?E. Ovkovv ravra el ravrrj rretyvKtv, ov8ev 8rj 

7rXt] ppeXoi/xev av eyco re Ka\ av rrpcorov \xev kmyei- 

i$p{]cravres oXov 7rapa8elyparos I8elv rrjv cpvcriv ev 

(TpuKpcp Kara ptepos dXXco irapaSelypan, perd 8e 



sist and are compounded of 
them. In the same manner, 
to inquire the form of a lion, 
of an oak, of gold — nay, of 
water, of air — is a vain pur- 
suit ; but to inquire the forms 
of sense, of voluntary motion, 
of vegetation, of colours, of 
gravity and levity, of density, 
of tenuity, of heat, of cold, and 
all other natures and qualities, 
which like an alphabet are not 
many, and of which the es- 
sences upheld by matter of all 
creatures do consist, — to in- 
quire, I say, the true forms of 
these, is that part of meta- 
physique which I now define 
of." 

1. TO. TWV TTOLVTCOV OTOl^Sla] 

" The alphabet of things," i. e. 
the ideas. Cf. Theaet. 201 sqq. 

2. to re pev — (peperai] Cf. 



Phileb. 15 : rore pev iiri Barepa 
kvkXcov kol crvpcpvpcov eh ev, rore 
8e iraXiv aveXlrranv nal 8iape- 
pifav. 

9. na>? tyap+] Stallbaum 
is probably right in conj. nas 
ap—. 

15. SXov] The "whole" is 
often put by Plato for the 
universal, to which Kara pepos 
is here opposed as the par- 
ticular. Cf. Rep. 6, 491 c: 

Aaftov Toivvv, rjv S' eyco; oXov 

avTov 6p6ws. Theset. 178 a: 

el 7rep\ iravros tls rov e'ldovs 
epcorar] k.t.X. lb. 1 82 b : Kara 
peprj ovv aKOve. 

16. aXXa] Other, as the par- 
ticular is other than the ge- 
neral. 

per a 8e ravra peXXovres — ] 

" Intending, however, after- 
wards to bring the same na- 



nOAITIKOS. 



85 



279 



278. ravra p.eXXovT€?, em to tov fiaaiXem peytaTov ov 
ravTov eldos air eXaTTOVcov (jjepovre? 7ro0ev, Sea 
rrapadeiypaTo? hrij(eLpeTv av ty)v tcov Kara ttoXlv 
Oepaireiav Tiyyr) yvcopl^eiv, tva virap avT bveiparos 
r)plv yiyvrjTai. ; 

NE. 20. YIdvv p}v ovv 6p6m. 

ftE. YlaXiv 8rj top tpirpocrOev Xoyov dvaXrjTTTeov, 
&)? lireiSr] tco (3ao-iXtKco yc.vet rrjs 7rep\ ra<s 7roXets 
eirip.eXeias ap(j)io-fir)TOvai ptvploi, Sel Sr) Travras diro- 

yGOpiQELV TOVTOV? KCLL pOVOV tKELVOV XlTTtlv. KCU 7TpOS 

tovto 8rj irapadeiypaTOs ecpapiev 8eiv tlvos r)puv. 

NE. 20. Kai pcdXa. 

SE. T/ Srjra irapafteiypd tl? av, eyov Tr)v avrrju 
^ttoXltlkyj^ 7rpaypaT€iav, apiKporarov wapaOepevo? 
h Ikclvcds av evpoi to ^rjTovpievov ; fiovXei 7rpos Aios, 
d> ^coKpares, el per) tl Trpoyeipov eTepov eyoptev, aXX' 
ovv tj]v ye v(pavTiKrjv irpoeXcopeOa ; Ka\ TavTrjv, el 
So/cel, per) Trdcrav ; airo^prjaet yap 'laca? r) 7rep\ to. e/c 
tcov epicov v(paap.aTa' ra^a yap av rjp.lv Ka\ tovto to 
pepos avTrj? p,apTvprjaei€ irpoaipeOev o fiovXopeOa. 

NE. 20. Tlyapov; 



illustrate 
for us tins 
poird of 
method, 

and pre- 
pare the 
way for a 
more en- 

5 lightened 
view of the 
States- 
man's 
office. 
Reverting 
then to 
what has 
been pre- 

IO viously 
said, that 
we must 
try to clear 
away from 
the King 
the crowd 
of rival 
artists, we 
select as an 

j - example 
the art of 
weaving 
woollen 
cloth. 



ture from some lesser subject 
to bear on the most important 
nature of the king, and to 
endeavour — ." The construc- 
tion is determined by a sort 
of attraction from the previous 
participle. 

I . piyicrrov ov ravrbv ei'So?] 
Cf. Kep. 4, 435 a : o ye ravrov 
av tis Trpooenroi peiifiv re Kai 
eXarrov. 

3. rav Kara. noXiv] MaSC. 

4. vrrap avr oveiparos] Cf. 
supr. 277 d. 

7. tov epTvpoo-Qtv Xoyov ava- 



XtjtttIov] P. 268 d : ew? av tovs 
TrepiKe^vpevovs avra ku\ rrjs 
avvvoprj? avra avTiTVOLOvptvovs 
irepuXovres Ka\ x a> pL°~ avTes " 7r ' 
eVeiVcov Kadapov p.6vov eKelvov 
a.T;o<pr)va>p.ev. Also 275 — 2 7 7- 

IO. eKeivov] r'ov fiaaiXea im- 
plied in rw (3acriXiKcp yevei. 

14. *TToXlTtKrj*] MSS. TToXlTl- 

k\]v. The correction occurred 
also to Ast and Stallbaum. 

20. paprvprjaeie Ttpoaipe6ev ] 

The participle, as in npityei 
pr)6ev, supr. 269 c, and the 
like. 



86 



FIAATQNOS 



3E. Tt 8i]Ta ov, KaOanep ev tow ep7rpoa0(v 76- p. 
pvovTts pe'py peptov eKaaTov 8ir)povp€0a, kou vvv 
nepl vcpavTLKifv tcwtov tovto eSpdcrapev, kou Kara c 
8vvapiv o Tt pdXiara 8lu fipa^etov Ta\v ttolvt eVeA- 
5 OovTts iraXiv ijXOopev eVt to vvv xPWipov ; 

NE. 212. Urn Xeyus ; 

SE. Avti)v ti]v 8ie£o8ov airoKpLCTLv aoL iroLrj- 
crofxat. 

NE. 20. KaXXiaT ehres. 
io ^E. "Eart to'lvvv iravTa rjpuv biroaa Srjpiovpyov- 
pcev kou KTCopeda, tol pev eW/ca tov iroielv tl, to. 8e 
tov pj] 7ida\eLv dpLWTrjpia' kou t&v dpvvTrjplcov rd 
pcev dXe^KpdppaKa kou Oeia kou dv0pd>7rtva, ra 8e cl 
TrpofiXrjpaTa' tcov 8e irpofiXrjpdTcnv Ta plv irpbs tov 
iSTroXepLOv birXicrpLaTa, Ta 8e (ppdypaTa' kou tgov 
(ppaypaTcov Ta pcev irapair^TacrpaTa, Ta 8e 7rpb? 



I . Ti ov — ihpdaap.ev ] Cf. 

Soph. 251 e. Phileb. 54 c. 

3. Kara bvvap.LV — Sta /3pax«W] 

This is fulfilled in the follow- 
ing sentence, in which the 
method of dichotomies is ex- 
emplified as it were in short 
hand. Perhaps also there is 
here a sly anticipation of 
the length to which the illus- 
tration is allowed to run, 
which is made the occasion of 
comment afterwards. 

7. AvTTJV TTOll)(TOjXai ] Cf. 

Soph. 250 a : Treipdaopai 8pav 
tovto epcoTcov ae KaBcnrep itceivovs 
tots, \va apa tl kol Trpoicopev. 

10. hrjp.Lovpyovp.eu kci\ KT«>p.e6a\ 

7T01TJTLK1] and KTTJTLKTj (Soph. 2 I 9) 

are thus combined. 

1 3. d\e£i(pdpp.aKa kol 6ela Km 

dvdpamLva] Preventives divine 
and human — in the form of 



talismans or of drugs. 

14. to>v 8e — o-vv8erd] "De- 
fences from the weather are 
housing and body-shelter : of 
the latter sort are mats and 
envelopments ; which are of 
one piece or of several. Those 
of several pieces are stitched 
or otherwise compacted, of 
vegetable fibre or of hair or 
wool : and of these some are 
felted together with the help 
of water and earth, while some 
are compacted of themselves." 

16. Trapo.ireTdo-p.aTa] " Cui'- 

tains — to shut out the view." 
Hesycll. : TtapaTreTdo-paTa, irapa- 
K.a\vp.p,aTa. Cf. Prot. 316 e : 
tols Texvais TavTais 7rapa7T€TU- 
o-paaip ixprjo-avTO. The word is 
used also by Herodotus of the 
Persian hangings found in the 
tent of Mardonius at Platsea. 



nOAITIKOS. 



87 



279. )(€ificdva? kou Kavjiara d.Xe^i]Ti]pia' tcov Se ciXe^ifTrf- 
picov to. fiev areydafiara, tcl Se o-KeiroxrpoTa' kou 
tcov aKeiracrfiaTcov inroirtTacr flora fiev dXXa, irepi- 
KaXvpLfxara Se krepa' irepiK.aXvfifid.Tcov Se to fiev 

e bXoayio-Ta, avvOera Se erepa' tcov Se avvQercov to. 
fiev TprjTa, to Se avev Tprjcrecos crvvSeTa' kou tcov 
aTprjTcov to, fiev vevpiva (fivTcdv eK yr/?, to. Se Tply^iva' 
tcov Se Tpiyivcov to. fiev vSaai kcll yfj KoXXifTa, to Se 
avTa. avTois crvvSeTa. tovtolctI 8r) toI? e/c tcov eavTois 
avvSovfievcov epyaaOelatv dfivvTifpiois koI aKeiracr- 
fiacn to fiev ovofia \fio.Tia eKaXecra/iev ttjv Se tcov 
IjiaTLCov fiaXiCTTa eTrifieXovfievrjv Te^vrjv, cocnrep tot€ 

>• ttjv Trj? 7roXeco9 TroXiTiKrjv etrro/iev, OVTCO Kal VVV TO.V- 
tt\v irpoueiTTCOfiev air ai>Tov tov TrpdypaTos IfioTL- 
ovpyiKrjv' (pcdfiev Se kou vcpavTiKr/v, ocrov erri tyj tcov 
IfiaTLcov epyaala fieyiaTOv rjv fiopiov, /it]8ev Sicupepeiv 



Protectionw 
are prophy- 
lactii 
defences. 
Defences 

are armour 
and bar- 
riers. Bar- 

5 riers are 
screens and 
weather- 
stops. Wea- 
ther- 
are shelter 
and clothes. 
Clothes are 
rugs and 
integu- 
ments. In- 
teguments 
are of one 
piece or 
composite. 
The compo- 
site are 
stitched or 
otherwise 

j r combined. 
Those un- 
stitched 
are of 



7. The genitive (pvrcov de- 
pends on ear), which is to be 
supplied, but at the same time 
defines more particularly the 
idea of veipivov, " of fibres, 
from plants." 

9. ro^Toto-t] Several MSS. 
have Tovroiai : but this is a 
case Avhere the chorior lectio is 
preferable. 

10. dfivvrripiois ] Cf. Legg, 

1 1, 920 e : 01 to. rav &T)p.iovpy£)v 
(rco^ovres rexvaicnv erepais dpvv- 
rrjpiois e'pya. 

15. ocrov] This can hardly 
mean " Inasmuch as." In 
Rep. 1, 328 d, which Ast com- 
pares (Lex. s. v.), 00-ov is 
distinctly an accusative of 
measure, and is answered by 
TocrovTov, which could not be 
introduced here without de- 
stroying the sense. And if so 



rendered, the words must be 
understood to anticipate what 
is brought out afterwards, 
that weaving is only a part of 
the making of clothes. This 
should be kept in the back- 
ground here. The word al- 
ludes to what is said above 
and explained immediately be- 
low, that only a part of the 
art of weaving is concerned 
with making woollen gar- 
ments. 279 b: Kal ravTTjv, el 
8oKel, pr) iracrav k.t.\. This is 

confirmed by rjv. " At least 
that very large portion of this 
art which we saw to be for 
the making of clothes." ocrov 
therefore limits the subject of 

8t.a(pepeiv. 

eVi] As in Gorg. 463 c : 

TCTTapa ravra popia em rerrapaiv 
TTpdypao-iv, alib. 



88 



ITAATQNQ2 






vegetable 
fibre or of 
hair. Those 

of hair are 
compacted 
with ear tli 

and water, 
or com- 
bined of 
their own 
substance 
without 
such help. 
These last 
are called 
clothing : 
and the 
art which 
tends on 
these may- 
be called 
cloth- 
making : 
which dif- 
fers from 
the weav- 
ing of wool, 
as the King 
and the 
Statesman 



ttX))v ovofiaTi ravT)]? r?/9 IpariovpyiK)]?, KaOanep p. 28 p: 

KOLKU TOT€ T)]V f3a(TlXlKy]V T?/9 TToXlTLKl^. 

NE. SO. 'OpOorard ye. 

3E. To //era tovto 8rj avXXoyiaojp.eOa, otl ttjv 
5 ipaTioov v(f)avTiKi)v ovTco piiOelcrdv tls rd)( dv 'lkolvcos 
etprjaOaL So^eie, p.rj 8vvdp.evo? ^vvvoelv otl twv pev b 
lyyvs ijvvepycov ovrrco dicopicrrai, rroXXcov 8e eTepcov 
^vyyevcov direp.eplo-6y). 

NE. 20. YIolcov, eiwe, tjvyyevcov ; 
to 3?E. Ov\ eowov rots \e)(6a.criv, coy (palvec ttoX.lv 
ovv -ffeoiKev eiravureov dp^opevov thro TeXevTrjs. el 
ydp ^vvvoets ttjv olfceioTTjTa, ti)v fxev 8terep.op.ev drr 
avT-qs vvv Srj, ttjv tcov arpcoparcov avvflecnv, irepi- 
(3oXf) yropl^ovre^ kou v7ro(3oXfj. 
'5 NE. 20. Mav0dvco. 

SE. Kcd pj]V TT)V €K TOW XlVCOV KOU aTTapTCOV KOU C 



2. KCLKil r6re\ 259 b, c. See 
also 274 e. 

4. avWoyicraipeda] " Let US 

reflect." " Let us think, put- 
ting together what has been 
said." Or, perhaps, " Com- 
paring this argument with the 
preceding." As the definition 
of the king seemed to be com- 
plete, at the end of the first 
series of divisions, so might 
the definition of the weaver at 
this point. Yet neither has 
been distinguished from his 
greatest rivals. 

10. ttoKiv cvv 1"T eoixev inavi- 
reovj Either cos eomev or inavL- 

reov elvai seems to be required. 

11. dp^opevov drrd reXevTrjs] 

" Beginning from the end." 
As in resuming the " gene- 
alogy" of the Sophist, 226 a, 



ib. 268. This order is not 
strictly followed, however, un- 
less the " end " includes all 

from Kal tcov CTKeiracrpaTcov 

downwards. 

el fjvvvoels ttjv oiKeioTTjTa] 
Young Socrates' question, Uoicov 
— £vyyevS>p ; shewed that he 
had not observed the likeness 
or kindred, e. g. between eo-drjs 

and arpcopara. 

12. ttjv pev 81eTep.op.ev] pev is 

answered by kol pr)v. 

ttjv pev vnoftdkr] ] " We 

just now cut off from the 
weaving of garments that of 
bed clothes, distinguishing 
them by the one being put 
under us and the other round. 
l^.-rrepiftohf) kul v7ro(3o\j}] Supr. 
vTronerdcrpaTa pev aXAa, nepiKa- 
\vppara 8e erepa. 



nOAITIKOS. 



89 



80. iravTcop, birocra ('pvrwv apri vevpa Kara Xoyov tiiro- 

\xev, Srjpuovpyiav iracrav a^e/Ao/xe^* ti~jv t av ttlXi-j- 

tlkyjv afpcopiaafieOa /cat Tr/v rfj rprjaei kou pa(Pfj 

^pap.evr)v avvOeaiv, rjs rj irXeicrTr) aRVTOTO/JUKr). 

NE. 20. Yldvv p}v ovv. \ 

£jE. Kai Toivvv T7]v twv oAoo-^/crra)^ aK€7racr/id- 

T(dv Oepcnrelav, StpjuarovpyiKyis, /cat ray tw areyaa- 

/mx,tcoi>, oaai re kv OLKoSopuKfj kou oXy t6ktovikJj kou 

d lv a'XXai? reyvais peup.aT(Dv <tt€ktikou yiyvovrai) 

avfJL7rdaa9 a<fielXop.€i>, oaai re 7repl ras KXoirds kou 

Tas /3/a irpd^eis SiaKcoXvriKa. epya irapeypvrai Teyyai 

(fipaypLOLTOJV, irepi re yeveaiv e7ri6rjp.aTovpyLas ovaai 

Rat ras twv dvpcofidroiv wrj^ei?, yo/jKpcoriKiis dirovejx- 



I. (pvrcov vevpa — e'lnopev\ Viz. 
in saying vevpiva (pvrav supr. 

Kara. Xoyou] Following ana- 
logy. 

8. oaai re — yiyvovrai] I. e. 
oaai re ev oIko8. k. ok. rexrov. are- 
KTiKai (or o~Teyao~TLKat) yiyvovrai, 
Kai oo~ai ev aXkais Texv. pGVfi&Tesv 
crreKT. yiyv. 

9. pevpdrav o-TeKTiml] "Hous- 
ing" is not an adequate trans- 
lation of o-Teyaa-TiKT), as this 
includes the damming of rivers 
and the like : " the art of 
making wind-and-water-tight." 
Many of the words in this 
passage are quoted, with others 
from the Politicus, by Pollux, 
Onomasticon 7, 208-10, who 
adds : etre o-irov8d((L>v e'xprjro rols 
ovopacrtv, ei're Ka\ prj — Xeyco Se, 
81a to ev eviois ra>v ovopdrcov /3iai- 
orepov xpV°~@ M - 

IO. ocrai Te — re'xvrjs] "And all 
the arts which produce pre- 
ventive barriers, as against 
theft and violence, such as are 
the process of lid-making and the 



fixing of doors, being separate 
portions of the art of joining." 
The order is oaai re^vai nape- 
Xovrai — 8iaKcokvTiKa epya cppaypd- 

tuv. The genitive of apposi- 
tion again recals the language 
of tragedy. This class was not 
strictly included in the Trapane- 
rdapara of the previous enume- 
ration. 

13. yopcpcoTiKrjs airovepr)6e1o-8ai 
popia Texvrjs] Either " set apart 
as portions of the joiner's art," 
or " having had assigned to 
them several portions of the 
joiner's art." For the latter, 
cf. infr. 281 c: /xeyuXa Se {^pn) 
Ka\ acpiaiv avrais cnrovepovcrai. 

The use of the passive would 
then be analogous to rriarev- 
opai ti, " I am entrusted with 
something" — a trace of which 
occurs as early as Plat. Ep. I. 
309 a : biomcov ri)v vperepav ap- 
Xr)v iremarevpevos rravrccv pd- 
Xto-ra. Other instances in 
which a noun which would 
have followed the active verb" 



differed, in 
aame only. 
But though 
the di fini 

tion is spe- 
cious, we 
see "ii re- 
flection 

that the 
ari baa still 
to be dis- 
tinguished 
from those 
most akin 
to it. Se- 
veral kin- 
dred arts 
have in- 
' deed been 
parted off, 
such as the 
making of 
bedclothes, 
of skins, of 
linen cloth, 



no 



riAATONOS 



and rush 
matting, of 
Fi It, of 
Bhoes, of 

houses and 
dams, of 

lids and 

doors, of 
armour, all 
of which 

are in- 
cluded in 
the cate- 
gory of 
defences. 
The art of 
magical 
charms was 
early re- 
jected, so 
that one 
only art, 
that of de- 
fying wea- 
ther by the 
production 
of a woollen 



■>]$eurai fiopta T€)(yrj?' rrjv re oTrXoTrouKi-jV (hrtTepo- p. 2> 
fji€0a, fxeydXr]? kcu iravroias rrj? irpo^XrifxarovpyLKrj^ 
T/iTJ/ia ovcrav dvvdfitw' kou Sr) kol t?]v payevTiKrjv 
ttjv irepl to. dXe^KpdppaKa kolt dp^us evdvs enw- e 
5 piadpeda ^vpTracrav, /cat XeXoiirapev, &>£ 86{jcufiev av, 
avri)i> ti-jv ^-jTi-jOeiaav cljxvvtlk^v yeifiwvwv, ipeov irpo- 
/3A?}/xoctos > epyao-TiKijv, ovop.a hi vtyavTLKrjv M^Ouaav. 

NE. 20. "Eot/ce yap ovv. 

SE. 'AAA' ovk earl tt(o reXcof, co ttou, tovto Xe- 
voXeypevov. 6 ydp ii> dpyjl T V? T ^ v ipaTtcDV ipyaaia? 
dirTOfxeuos tovvclvt'iov v(j)r) Bpav (patveTai. 

NE. 20. Um ; P- 2 

SE, To plv tt)s v(prJ9 avfnrXoKi] tls earl wov. 



in the dative case is made the 
subject of the the passive verb, 
are Legg. n, 925 e: robs «rt- 

TdTTUpiVOVS. lb. 926 a: Tols VOflO- 

BeTovptvois (masc). lb. 937: eav 
c7n<TKr](j)dT], Rep. 1, 337 a: eXeel- 
<r6ai paXXov — fj xaXeTruiveadai. 

For a generalization similar 
to those in the present pas- 
sage, cf. Legg. 12, 944 c : <ai- 
pol — Xv&ecos — vecos r) £g>ou twos, 
ovs ivrovovs re kol viro£d)pa.Ta Kcii 
vevpcov €7Tlt6vovs piav ovaav <pv- 
o~iv tjt,ecnrapptvr]V, 7roXXaxov 7roX- 
Xols ovdpacn Trpoaayopevnvcriv. 

3. payevTiKrju ] The word 
nayeta and the almost equally 
rare word ake£«pdppaKov occur 
in Ale. I. 122 a, 132 b. 

There is a slight inaccuracy 
of reference in putting toge- 
ther the 6\6arxi<TTa (TKeTrdrrpaTa 
and the a-reydapara, the former 
of which came after, while the 
latter preceded, the mention 

of CTTpcopara. 

7. Xexdelaav] The participle 
is added, as in tragic poetry, 



to round the sense. Cf. Soph. 
Trach. 1 : dpxeuos tpavels. 

9. reXeou XeXeypevov ] Cf. 
SUpr. 271 a : adijXov biecpdeipero. 

1 1 . tovvuvtlov vcpfj ] If we 

compare Soph. 226 b, where 
the process of carding is made 
the symbol of the Elenchus 
(a figure which may have 
partly suggested this), it will 
not seem fanciful to suppose 
an allusion here to the logical 
process of biaipeais, which, as 
was shewn in the Sophist, is 
imperfect without the converse 
process of crvvaycoyrj or crvp- 
irXoKrj. The work of the 
Statesman also has these two 
elements, in common with 
every art that is based on 
knowledge. Cf. infr. 308 c : 

Trdaa eTTLCTTrjprj iravra)(ov ra pev 
poxBqpd els Bvvapiv dnofidXXei, 
ra 8' eVtr?;Seta kcu XPW T ^ L eXa- 
/3ev, eK tovtcov 8e Kai opolcov Kai 
avopoioov ovrav, ndw els ev aura 
^vvdyovcra, piav tlvo, Bvvapiv kcu 
IBeav Brjpiovpyel. 



nOAITIKOS. 



91 



?8i. NE. 20. Nat. 

HE. To Be ye rwv avvearcorcav koll crv/JL7re7riXy- 
\xev(x>v BlolXvtlki). 

NE. 20. To irolov By ; 

HE. To r^s* rod ^aivovros Teyyys epyov. ?) tyjv 
^avTLKi]v ToXjja]aofiev v(f)ai>TLKr)i> koll tov ^dvrrjv tv? 
bvTa v§avTr)v KaXeiv ; 

NE. 20. OvdcLfAW. 

HE. Kat /,i?)z/ r?/i> ye av aTy/iovo? epyaariK^v koll 
KpOK-qs ei TL9 v(j)avT lio)v 7rpocrayop€veL, irapdBo^ov re 
b koll \j/evSo? ovofia XeyeL. 

NE. 20. Has yap ov ; 

HE. Tt 5c'; Ki>a(j)€VTiKr)i> avparaaav koll tt)i> 
txKecTTLKiiv irorepa p.i]BejJLLav eiTLpeXeLau firjBe tlvol 
OepojKelav eaOrJTO? dtofxev, i] koll ravras irdcras d)S 
vcpavTLKCL? Xe^ojiev ; 

NE. 20. OvSa/im. 

HE. 'AAAa fXTju tt]9 ye Oeponrelas dp.(f)La(3y]Ti , j- 
(tovctlv avTOLL ^vparao~aL koll rr}? yeveaecDS TYjS TCDP 
ipLoiTLGiv rfj tyjs v<fiai>TLKr}? SuvdfieL, [xeyLcrrop \xlv 
fiepos eKelvrj BLBovaaL, fieyaXa Be kou a(pl(TLi> clvtqus 
throvip-ovaaL. 
c NE. 20. TLdvv ye. 



nairn 

. would 

bi in to be 
left. 

The defini 

t inn, how - 

5 ever, is not 
yet com- 
plete. 
Other pro- 
cesses be- 
sides weav- 
ing are 
engaged in 
the making 
of cloth. 

io Forcarding 
is not com- 
bination 
but^ divi- 
sion. Nor 
are spin- 
ning and 
weaving 
to be con- 
. founded. 

Once more, 
fullini'; and 
daruing are 
processes 
concerned 
with cloth, 
from which 
weaving 
must be 

20 distin- 
guished. 
Here are 
several 
rival arts, 
whose land- 
marks must 



2. To 8e ye — SiaAvTiK)';] Sc. 
to 8e ye ev apxfl rrjs to>v Ipdncov 
epyaaias bpaspevov earn irpa^is 

8iaXvTLKr]. 

1 3. Kva<pevTiK.i]v\ Cf. Goi'g. 
491 a: ertevreas re Kai payetpovs 
\eya>v Kai larpovs ovdev iravei. 

Soph. 227 a. 

1 6. vfpavTLKas ] Cf. Gorg. 

450 b : ti Sjj 7TOT6 Taj aXkas 

re^vas ov p)]TopiKcis KaXe'is, ovo~as 

rrep\ \6yovs, einep tuvttjv prjro- 

* 



piKijv KaXets, f] av 17 nep\ \6yovs ', 

17. Ovdapobs] Sc. vCpavTiKas. 
Only the latter half of the 
question is answered : hence 
Socrates calls attention to the 
former part, with aX\a pljv — 
ye—. 

18. rijs — depctnelas ] For 

the construction without nepi, 
cf. infr. 275 b, 279 a, Phileb. 

2 2 C : tujv VLKr]TT]plcoj> ovk ap- 
<pio-fr)Tw 7T0) imep vov. 

N 2 



be placed 
with bare. 

To whirl, 

must be 
addedthoae 
which forge 

the wea- 
ver's tools, 
.and which 
may be 

\ i.'U I'll Ms 

adminicu- 
lar. The 
definition 
of weaving 
in wool will 
not lie com- 



92 IIAAT0NO2 

3E. Ylpo? Toivvv ravTcu? en tos Tu>v tpyaXeiaiv p. 28 28 
ftilfxiovpyovs Ttxyas, 81 d>v diroTtkeiTai ra tt)$ vcjyrj? 
epya, SokcIu \pr) to ye crvvairlas elvai irpocrivoir)- 
oaaOai ttclvtos v(f)ao-paT09. 
5 NE. SO. 'OpeSrara. 

SE. Ylorepov ovv i)puv b irep\ tyjs vfyavTiKrjs Ao- 
yos, ov irpoaXopiiOa fiepovs, 'iKavm earat Suopio-- 
/levo?, lav ap avrrju rwv i7rip.eXeta)V, biroaai irepi 
Ti)v epeav icrOrJTa, eh rrjv KaAAi(TTr)v kou fxeylaTrjv 



2. 81 Z>v\ Sc. epya\elu>v. 

3. to ye — TTpoo~noit]crao~6ai\ 

" Lay claim to be at least co- 
operative causes :" cf. dpcpicr- 

j3r]Tr]crovaiv supr. 

7. ov 7rpoei\6pe&a pepovs] An 
explanatory limitation. " The 
art of weaving, that part of it 
which we selected:" supr. 279 

b : tovto to pepos avTrjs irpoai- 

p(6eu. The second noun limits 
the first, with which it is in 
apposition : as in such expres- 
sions as ol 'Adrjualoi ol (TTpaTr]- 

yoi in Thucydides. 

8. onoo-ai — Ti6£>pev~\ The 
reading of most MSS., els tt]v 
Ka\\io-Tr)v, is sufficiently de- 
fended by Soph. 235 a (where 
see note) ; Tim. 57 e : klvyjo-iv 

be els dvcopa\6TT]Ta del Ti6cbpev. 
Legg. 867 b : els e'lKova ttov 

6a>p.ev. For the omission of 
the substantive verb after 
ottoVos, which frequently hap- 
pens, cf. infr. 285 a : ■ndvG' 
onoaa evrexva. The Zurich 
editors read elcri, which is 
found in Flor. i. The Bodl., 
with A, has els yrjv. 

9. els Ttjv KaWicTTrjv kciI pey'ia- 

ttjv Traaa>v ] This recals the 
example by which the last 
hypothesis concerning know- 



ledge in the Thea±tetns is il- 
lustrated (p. 207 d): to exav n 
o~t]pelov elnelv a> tcov uttuvtcov 

8ia(fiepei to epcoTapevov — oinv 

rjAiov irepi iKavov oipai o~oi etvat 
awohe^acrQai on to \apnpoTaT6v 
eo~Ti tuv Kara tov ovpavuv Iovtcov 

■nep\ yrjv. Since that definition 
was given, the argument of the 
"Sophist" has intervened. We 
now see that it is not enough 
to describe the sun as diffident 
in brightness from other hea- 
venly bodies. These other 
bodies, which are not the sun, 
have a nature of their own, 
which is defined by and de- 
fines their difference from the 
sun. I do not know the sun, 
or any other thing, therefore, 
until I have determined the 
exact limit between each of 
these other natures and the 
one in question. Comp. Legg. 
6, 768 d : to 8e oXoi> Ka\ d*pt/3es 
nepl evos re kol iravTav tcov Kara 
ttoXiv Kai 7roXiTiKTjv ovk etrri yi- 
yveo~6ai aacpes k. t. X. Parm. 
136 b, C : nep\ otov av del imodfj 
cos bvros Ka) ovk 'ovtos Kai otlovv 
n'XXo nddos Tido-)(OVTOS, 8el (tko- 
•ne\v tu {-vpftaivovTa 7rpos civto 
Kai npos ev eKaaTov t5>v aXXcov, 
o ti av TtpofKji K.r.X. 



nOAITIKOS. 



93 



zSi. iraacov TiOcopev ; rj XeyoLjxev /lev av tl dXrjOe's, ov 
"• fxrjv aa(j)is ye ovBe TeXeov, irpiv av kol t auras avrr/? 
waaas TrepieXodfiev ; 

NE. 20. 'Opdm. 

HE. Ovkovv /xera. Tavra Troiryreov o Xeyo/xev, "iv 
ecpefjij? rj/jLii> 6 Xoyo? trj ; 

NE. SO. nwy 5' ov; 

HE. Tlpcorov p.ev to'lvvv Bvo Te^yas ovaas 7repi 
iravTa to. Bpwpteva Oeaacofieda. 

NE. SO. TLvas ; 

HE. Tt)j> /xeV r?;? ye^ecreco? ovaav ^vvatTLOv, rrjv 
B> avrrjv air lav. 

NE. 20. nw ; 

HE. ' Oaai pev to irpayp.a avrb ptrj BrjpiovpyovaL, 
e rah Be BrjiuovpyovaaLs opyava 7rapao-Kevd{pvcriv, 
cov pLrj irapayevopievwv ovk av wore epyaaOelrj to 
7rpoaT€Tayi±evov eKaaTj] twv Teyycov, ravTa? fxev 
i^vvaiTLOvs, tcls Be avTO to wpaypta direpyafypLevas 
aiTias. 

NE. 20. "Ex« yovv Xbyov. 

HE. Mera tovto Brj Ta? p.ev irepl re arpaKTOvs 
Ka\ KepKtBas K.a\ birbaa aXXa opyava ttjs irepl tol 
a/KpieapLara yevearem KOivcovel, Tracras ^vvairlov? 



plete until 
all these 
have been 
parted off. 
"We must 
not be con- 
tented with 
saying that 

5 it is the 
noblest of 
the indus- 
tries which 
have to do 
with wool- 
len cloth. 
First, then, 
we may 
draw a uui- 
versal dis- 
tinction 
between 
productive 
and admi- 
nicular 
arts ; and 
then apply 
this distinc- 

j j. tion to the 
case in 
point. 
Washing, 
mending, 
and other 
furbishing 
of clothes, 
carding, 
spinning, 

•20 and the 
other em- 
ployments 
operosce 
Minerva 
included 
underwool- 



2. 7rph av] So all the 
MSS. except 2Y. aS is suffi- 
cientty in point : and for the 
omission of au (more common 
in tragedy), cf. Tim. 57 b : 
irp\v — iK(pvyfjs, where there is 
no good reason to suspect the 
text. 

8. 8vo — Texyas] The dis- 
tinction between cause and 
condition, which is the essen- 



tial point in this part of the 
argument, is also stated in 
Phfedo 99 a, b ; Phileb. 27 a; 
Tim. 46 c, d. 

2 2. rrjs nepl ra apcpucrpaTa 
yeueaecos] Cf. Soph. 25 1 c: 
rrjs nepl (ppovrjaiv KTrjaecos. " All 

the instruments that share in 
the operations for producing 
clothes." 



94 



IIAAT0NQ2 



working, 
are pro- 
arts, 



€L7ro)/ji€i>, rets Se avra OepoLTrtvovaas kul Sijpiovpyou- p. »j 
era? ahta? ; 

NE. 20. 'OpOoTara. 

HE. T&>i> cuTicov drj ir\vvTLKr)v p,lv koll aK€(TTiKr)i> p. 282] 
5 /cat iraaau ti)v irepl ravra 6epairevTiKr)v, iroXki]^ 
ovarj9 Trj? KoaprjTiKrj? rovvravOa avrf/s popiov, et/cos* 
pdXiara irepikapfidvtiv ovopdfyi'Tas irav rfj re^vy 
rfi KvacpevTiK?). 

NE. 20. KaAwy. 
[o ££E. Kai )U?)i> * fjavriKrj* ye koll * vrjcrTiKr)* Kal 
iravra av ra 7repi ttjv ironqaiv avrr/v rrjs i(j6r)T0<s r\<i 
Xeyopev pepr], p. la rls Icttl riyviq tgjv vtto ttolvtcdv 
Xeyopcevtov, rj TaXaaiovpyiKT). 



I. avra] Sc. ra apepuapara. 

4. Twv alriav — nXwriKrjv] 

The partitive genitive, as in 
ttjs yvaa-TiKrjs oaov eTriraKTiKov, 
SUpr. 263 e; ra ire^a ra>v rjpepcov, 
supr. 265 b. 

5. TroWr/s — jx6piov~\ Appo- 
sition. The genitive is not 
absolute, but is resumed in 
avTTjs because of the interven- 
tion of the participle. See 
Theagt. J55 e, and note. 

7. irepihaixfiaveiv — KvcKpevTixfi] 

The dative is governed by 

7repiXapj3dvet.v, which 6vopd£ovras 
explains. Cf. Soph. 225 a : 
ra> — a-wpart 7rpos crcopara yLy- 
vopeva — ovopa Xeyeiv ri toiov- 
tov riBepevovs olov (Hmutikov. 

Phsedr. 273 e ; Theset. 148 e ; 
Soph. 226 e. The accusative 
ttuv depends on the participle 
and the infinitive taken toge- 
ther. 

nap] Agreeing with popiov, 
and of course including nXwri- 

Krjv, aKea-TiKrjV k.t.X. 



10.* gaVTLKl)* *VT](TTIK>]*~\ MSS. 

^avTKrjv — vrjariKrjv. The correc- 
tion is due to Stephanus. 

II. rjs Xeyopev] Sc. rr/s {peas. 

I 2. pla tls eari re^i"]] " Form 

a single art which is one of 
those universally acknow- 
ledged, that of working in 
wool." Cf. Legg. 7, 805 e: 

KepKt'Scoi/ ap%eiv koX ivao-qs raXa- 
aias. iari follows the num- 
ber of the nearest word, and 
is also assisted by the neuter 
plural peprj. Cf. infr. b, irav 
tovto, and 284 e, 288 d: Xpv- 

o~6v re Kal apyvpov Ka\ rrdvB' 

oirocra peraXXeverai K.r.X. Kal 

en cpXoi(TTi.Krj — Kal o<rai — elal 
re^vaf ev 8e avrb Trpocrayopevopev 
ttuv. Where avrb, referring to 
all the preceding nominatives, 
is made singular by ev. 

rwv — Xeyopevcov ] " Used 

in common parlance," so that 
it is needless to invent a 
technical name. Cf. Soph. 
220 d : vn avrcov Ta>v nepl TTjV 



nOAITIKOS. 



95 



282. NE. 20. Ilwy ydp ov ; 

h S*E. T?)y 87) TaXaaiovpyiKrjS 8vo Tp^pard icrrov, 
kcu tqvtoiv tKarepov apa 8volv TrecfjvKarou riyvatv 
fiiprj. 

NE. 20. n«? ; 

S*E. To /X€f ^OLVTIKOV KCU TO Tl}9 K€pKL<TTlKr)? 

ijpiav kol oaa ra ^vyKeipeva car dXXrjXcou d(f)L(TTr)(Ti, 
irav tovto toy €i> (ppd^etu Trjs re raXaaiovpyla^ avrrjs 
€(ttl 7T0V, kou peydXa rive Kara, irdvra i]plv rjar-qv 
T€)(ya, tj avyKpiTiKT] re kou dtaKpiTiKr] — 
NE. 20. Na/. 



Now of 
wool work- 
ing there 
are two 
chief kinds, 
each falling 

5 under one 
of the two 
great cate- 
gories of 
division 
and compo- 
sition. 
Carding 
and one 
use of the 

10 comb be- 
long to 
wool-work- 



Gr\pav 7TVpevTiKi)v prjdijvai crvp.- 

fJefirjitev. The Stranger loves to 
parade the commonness of his 
examples. For the genitive, 

cf. Rep. IO, 615 d : ideaaop-eda 
— Kal tovto tS)v 8eiva>v 6ea.pa.T00v. 

An art acknowledged by all 
men is distinguished from one 
for which a name has to be 
invented, such as 8o^op,iprjTiKr) 
in the Sophist. 

3. toutoiv eKarepov — Tre(pvi<a- 

tov] The dual verb is used 

because tovtoiv eKUTepov = tovtco 
eKciTepov, which is rather sug- 
gested by the plural /xeprj. 
<Jf. infr. 284 e : 8ui(pepov aXXr)- 
\olv. " And these are parts, 
each of them of two arts at 
once :" viz. the one of Ta\a- 
o~iovpyiKr] and o-vyKptTLKT}, the 
other of ToXao-. and 8iaKpiT. 

6. to Trjs KepKicrTiKrjs rjpiav] 

The use of the Kepxh or 
" comb" was partly to drive 
the threads of the woof close 
together, but partly also (as 
appears from Cratyl. 388 a) 
to keep the threads of the 
warp and woof (here especially 
the warp, infr. ottjuoo-i) dis- 



tinct. This latter "half" of 
the use of the comb belongs 
to SiaKptTiKi), " divisive art." 

9. fieydXa Tive — 8iaKpLTiKr) ] 

The course of the sentence is 
interrupted by the introduc- 
tion of this clause. The words 
should have run, Trjs re raXa- 
o-iovpyias avTrjs ecrTi ttov Kal Trjs 

8iaKpiTiKr)s. But the last word 
required explanation, which is 
conversationally interposed. 

Cf. Horn. Od. I. 424, 5: 
alib. Soph. (Ed. Col. 471- 
473 : O. oTav 8e tovto x 6 ^' 
iiKr)paT0v \dj3a> ; X. KpaTijpes 
elo-iv, av8pos ev^eipos Tiyyr], hv 
KpaT epe^ov kcu Xafias up.cpio'To- 

p-ovs. Ejusd. Track 750-755 : 

od' elpne — uktt) tis — eaTiv, ev8a 

j3a>p.ovs opl^et. — ov viv — 

eo-el8ov. 

9. rjo-Trjv] " There are two 
comprehensive arts of univer- 
sal application, with which we 
are familiar." Cf. Soph. 228 

e : eyeveadrjv. lb. 258 C : r)v Te 

ical earn. Compare the frequent 
use of the perfect : e. g. vev6p.tKa 
Soph. 227 a, 228 a, 265 d, 
infr. 293 b. 



96 



nAATONOS 



tag and 
<li\ ision. 

l'.ui our 
concern is 
w iih that 
part of 
wool-work- 
tag which 
is a part of 
composi- 
tion : of 
which one 
kind twists 
and the 
other inter- 
laces. 



SE. Tt}? TOLVVV §ia.KpiTLK.l]S T\ T€ ^U.VTLKl] KOLL TOL 

vvv <5?) pyOeura airavTa Icftlv' ?} yap eV ipioi? re koll 
arypLoaL SiaKpLTiKt], «epKi8i p.ev aXXov rpoirov yiy- 
vofievr], x € P aL ^ erepov 9 f-oyev dcra dpruos ouofiara 
sipprjOrj. 

NE. 20. Haw i±ev ovv. 

£*E. KvBis 8rj ivaKiv ervyKpiTLKrjs fiopiov ap.a KOLL 

raXaaLOvpylas iv aury yLyvoptevov AdficopLew oaa 8e 

rrjs Slolkpltlkt}? t)v olvtoOl, */x€#fc3/i€Z/* £vp.TravTa, 8l)(a 

loripLvovres ryv rakaaLovpylav hiaKpiriKto re koll crvy- 

KpLTLKW T/jLTJ/jLOLTI. 

NE. 2Q. ALypyaOco. 

aE. To avyKpLTLKOP to'lvvv av aoi koll tolAolctl- 



p. 282 L 



2. iv ipiois re Kal ott^oo-i] 
gavTLKf} being employed with 
the former, to ttJj Kepiao-TiKrjs 
rnxicrv with the latter. 

3. tcepxidt] Viz. in the case 
of the warp. 

4. x e P (Ti l I n that of the 
raw wool. 

ecrx ev — ovofiara] Cf. Soph. 

227 a, ovopara eaxev, and note. 

Tim. 39 d : oaa 5V ovpavov 
Tvopevop-zva eo-^e Tponds. 

8. iv avTj} yiyvop.evov\ " Find- 
ing place therein :" viz. iv rfj 
TaKauLovpyiq, which is the ge- 
neral subject. " To be referred 
thither as contained therein :" 
as when a segment of one 
circle is contained in another 
circle. Stallbaum punctuates 
before avroBi, which he trans- 
lates hie statim, an emphatic 
sense, which in Attic Greek 
is generally reserved for avrov. 
" Let us now turn and take a 
part of the process of wool- 
working, which is at the same 
time a part of composition ; 



and let us dismiss ((ie6ia>nev) 
all the parts of division which 
we found there (rjv avrodi, sc. 
iv avrfj), separating the art 
into two halves, distinguished 
by composition and division." 
MSS. pericopev. No attempt 
is made to " follow up " (p.e- 
rUvat) the divisions of Siaicpi- 
tlkt]. Probably therefore for 
fieriafiev we should read p.e6i- 
S>p.ev or fieda>p.ev, as Hermann 
has already seen. The present 
tense agrees better with rifivov- 
res, which is in immediate 
construction with it. The 
pres. subj. occurs Phileb. 62 
d : p,edi£>. It is surprising 
that Dr. Badham should prefer 
p.€Trjpev to this. Cf. Soph. 267 
b : to S' a\\o TTav d(pwp,ev p,a- 
XaKicrdevTes — p.ede[ada>. 

13.T6 avyKpiriKov Siaiperiov] 

" You must again, Socrates, 
divide the part which belongs 
at once to combination and to 
wool-working." 



nOAITIKOS. 



97 



t83. ovpyiKov ajxa popiov, co ScoK/jares", SiaipeTe'ov, etirep 
" 'lko.vcos pteXXopev rrjv irpoppydelaav vtyavTiKrjv al- 
p-qaeiv. 

NE. 20. Ovkovv xpr). 

3^E. Xpr) /xeV ovi>' kcu Xeywpev ye avTrjs to pev 
elvai arpeTTTiKov, to 8e o-vpirXeKTiKOV. 

NE. 20. 'A/)' ovv pavdavco ; SoKei? yap pot to 
7repl tttjv tov o~Tr)p.ovos epyaalav Xeyeiv o-TpeirTiKov. 

HE. Ov jjlovov ye, dXXa kcu KpoKrjs. y yeveaiv 
ao~Tpo(f)ou Tiva avTrjs evprjaopev ; 

NE. 20. OvBafim. 

aE. Atopiaai 8r} kcu tovtolv eKctTepoW '/crco? yap 
e o 8iopio-pLo? eyKatpo? av ctol yevouro. 

NE. 20. Ufj; 

HE. Tfjde. twv 7rep\ ^avTiKrjV epycov pr\Kwdev re 
Kai cryov ttXcctos' Xeyopev elvai KccTaypcd tl ; 

NE. 20. No/. 

HE. Touroi; Srj to pev wrpaKTCp re crTpa(pei> kcu 
o-Tepeov vrjpa yevopevov OTr}p.ova pXv <pd0L to vrjpa, 



The warp, 
and also 

io the woof, 
are made 
by twist- 
ing. Hence 
spinning 
is distin- 
guished 
into two 
branches : 
the one 

*5 producing 
a compact 
and hard, 
the other 
a looser 
and softer, 
yarn — each 
being pro- 
portioned 



8. tov o-ttjuovos] The woof 
has not yet been mentioned. 

Cf. SUpr. : iv arrj/jLOCTi. 

9. dXka kcu KpoKrjs ] The 

woof was more loosely spun : 
hence, as well as for the rea- 
son just given, (that no men- 
tion had been made of the 
woof,) Young Socrates' over- 
sight is more excusable. 

yeveo~LV — evprjcropev ;] " Shall 
we find any mode of producing 
it without twisting?" 

15. rwv irepX £avTiKr]V epyoov] 

Tt, is to be supplied from below. 
It often happens in these dia- 
logues that a word is contrived 
to "pay a double debt." Cf. infr. 
226 b: tov cro(pLo-Tov nepi K.r.A. 



1 6. crxov 7r\aTOs] Cf. SUpr. C, 
note on eVx«/. 

KaTaypa] The word is used 
by Sophocles, Trach. 695, and 
the corresponding verb Kardyeiv 
occm-s in Soph. 226 c : £aiveiv, 
Ka.Ta.yeiv, KepKi^eiv. 

18. arpaKT(»] It would ap- 
pear from this that the woof 
was spun by the baud without 
the use of the spindle. 

19. o-Tepeov vrjpa] Probably 
hinting at a derivation for 

o-TT]p,-cov, quasi (TTeppovrjp.-. 

<TTT)p.OVa 0-T7\p.0V0V7)TlKr\V~\ Tlie 

sentence becomes irregular from 
expansion. The Bodl. has o-rn- 
povovqTiKT)V with AEIIEY. 



98 



HAATQNOS 



to tlie other 
w iih a view 
to the final 

result. 



These dis- 10 
tinctions 
bring the 
art of wool 



ti)v Se airtvOvvovaav aura reyyrjv dvat urr]ixovo\n]- 

TlKl'-jV. 

NE. 20. 'OpOm. 

SE. 'Oaa Se ye av rrjv \xlv crvo~Tpo(l)rjV yavvrjv 

5 Xafifiavei, rfj Se rod aTiyiovos ifiTrXe^ei wpo? rr\v rrj? 

yvd^ecos oXktjv ep/ieTpco? rrjv pLaXaKOTrjra 'Lately 

tolvt apa KpOKrjv pcev ra vr}6evTa, tyjv Se einTeTay\xe- 

vy)v avTois elvai reyi>r)v ™Tivofr KpoKOvrjTiKrjV (f)a>[Aev. 

NE. 20. 'Opdorara. 

SE. Kcu f±r)V to ye ttjs vtyavTiKrjs fiepo? o Trpov- 
OefxeOa, hovt'i irov hr\\ov rj^ij. to yap crvyKpiTiKr}? 



p. 28 



I. aira] Sc. ra tcivtijs Ttjs 
(TV<7Tpo(f)rjs (viz. rrjs vr)<Teas) epya. 

Vague neut. pi. : cf. Theret. 
207 e. 

4. x a ^ vr l v '\ Used literally 
— " open" (from x aLVW )- CJf. 
Aristoph. Av. 819 ; Passow, 
Lex. s. v. 

5. rfj Se rod — iV^et] " But 

have a softness proportioned 
to the intertexture of the 
woof, with a view to the de- 
gree of force to be used in 
dressing the cloth." So the 
gentle and brave natures are 
combined with a view to their 
profiting by the rubs which 
give the finishing touches to 
a state. Cf. infr. 310. The 
reading of 3, rov Kvacpews, de- 
serves consideration. 

8. * nva * ] MSS., rr/u : S 
om. Cf. Theset. 172c: ubi vulg. 
ttiv. four MSS., nva. Soph. 
2l8 C : Tex vr l TCS KrrjTiKTj. lb. 
220 e : rpiohovrla ris. KpoKo- 
vtjtikt] is arrag Xeyopevov, hence 

the article is out of place. 

IO. p.epos 6 rrp.] Sc. to rrjs 
ipeas eo-flrJTos v(pavriKOV. 



IT. ro yap — i(paPTLKTjv] "For 

when one part of the composi- 
tion contained in wool-working 
creates a fabric by the direct 
intertexture of warp and woof, 
we call the whole result wool- 
len cloth, and the art which 
presides over this we call 
weaving." Lit. " That portion 
of the combining branch of 
wool-working (which finds 
place) when" &c. Cf. supr. 
282 c. Or, perhaps, "When 
the branch of the art of com- 
bination which is contained in 
wool -working creates" &c. In 
the latter case the genitive is 
either (1) gen. of apposition, 
like Tivos yevovs in Soph. 257 e: 
or (2) t^s is genitive by attrac- 
tion to (TvyKpiTiKrjs for to, " the 
part of composition included 
in wool-working :" or (3) there 
may be a transition from the 
former to the latter meaning : 
i. e. cvyKpiTLKrjs is at first par- 
titive, but as resumed with ttjs, 
is the genitive of apposition. 
But the meaning given above 
is the most natural, and is not 



nOAITIKOS. 



99 



183. rrjs iv TaXacrLovpyta. fiopiov otolv evOvirXoKta KpoKrj? 
koll CTTrjfiovos airepydijirai 7rXey/ia, to fxev TrXe^Oev 
Qpnrav laOijra epedv, ttjv Se eVi tovtco Teyvijv ouaav 
TTpoaayopevo/xev v(pavTiKr)v. 

NE. 20. 'OpOoTara. 5 

SE. YAtV' TL 8tj 7T0T€ OVV OUK €V0V? UTTeKpLvdfltda 
b 7r\€KTLK1]V dvfXl KpOKT)9 KOLL CTTrjflOVOS ixpavTLKrjv, 

dXXd 7repLr]X6op.ev iv kvkXco irdpuroXXa 8lopl(jo/jl€vol 
p.drrjv ; 

NE. 20. Ovkovv epLOLye, co ijeve, [xdnqv ovhlv tcov 10 
piqOevTcov e'Sotje p-qOrjvaL. 

i£JE. Kat 6avp.a<TT0v ye ovdev dXXd rd)( av, 

CD p.CLKdpL€, 86^€L€. TTpOS 8r) TO VOCTrj/JLa TO TOLOVTOV, 

av apa iroXXaKLs vaTepov eTrly — 6avp.aaTov yap 
ou8ev — , Xoyov olkovoSv tlvol irpocrrjKOVTa irep\ irdv- 15 

C TCOV TOW TOLOVTCOV prjOrjVOLL. 

NE. 20. Ae'ye p.6vov. 

3?E. YlpCOTOU TOLVVV i8cO/JL€V TTOLCraV TTjV T€ V7T6p- 

fioXrjv koll T7)v eXXeLxj/Lv, tva kcltol Xoyov iiraLvtopLev 
koll yj/eycofiev tol /xaKpoTepa tov 8£ovtos eKacrTOTe 20 
Xeyop.eva koll TavavTLa irepl tol? T0Laa8e Blol- 
Tpifids. 



weaving 
intu clearer 
light : a:s 
that part 
of the com- 
position 
included 
in wool- 
working in 
which a 
web- is made 
by the di- 
rect inter- 
texture of 
woof and 
warp. 
But why 
could we 
not say at 
once that 
weaving 
was the 
intertex- 
ture of 
warp and 
woof? 
Lest some 
one should 
think our 
labour vain, 
let us exa- 
mine the 
whole ques- 
tion of 
length and 
brevity. 



the less probable for being 
somewhat involved. 17 iv raka- 
(Tiovpyla a-vyKpiTiKT] must in this 
case be supplied as the subject 

of aTTtpya^rjTUl. 

6. tl dr] 7rore] This raises 
the whole question of the uti- 
lity of the present method, for 
which see General Introduc- 
tion. Cf. also Gorg. 453, 454. 

13. to v6<rr)[xa to t.] Sc. to 
Sd^at aTTa pa.TT]v prjdrjvat. 

14. 7J-oAXajay] " Haply, as it 
very likely may." Cf. Phaadr. 



238 C : iav apa tvoXKukis vvpepo- 
Xtjtttos 7rpo'i6pTOS tov Xoyov yevm- 
pai, prj 6avpao-r]s. 

2 1 . TavavTia^ I. e. j3paxvTepa 
tov deovros. 

irep\ Tas Toidafte 6\arpi/3ds ] 

These words depend on inai- 

vapev kcli yp'tycopfu as well as On 

Xeyopepa. " That with refer- 
ence to such interviews as this 
we may apportion praise and 
blame reasonably to the argu- 
ments used in them." Cf. 
Phaedr. 234 e : Ti oV; ko.1 



O 2 



100 



HAATON02 



NE. 20. Ovkovv xpv- V- 2 ^; 

H*E. Oe/Oi <5?) roi;rG)i> avTwv o Aoyos yfjuv, oi/jloli, 
yiyvopevos opOoos av yiyvotTo. 

NE. 20. TtW ; 
5 SE. M^/couy re Trept /ecu (3paxvT7]TO? kcu 7rdar)9 
v7r€po)(r)? re Ken tAAelxf/eois. rj yap irov perprjTLKT] d 
7repl ttolvt iarl ravra. 

NE. 20. Nat. 

SE. AceAoopev tolvvv avri]v Svo pepr/' 8e7 yap 8r) 

io7Tp09 O VVV CnT€V(!)OfJL€l>. 

NE 20. Aeyois av rrjv diaipecriv 07rr). 

SE. Tjjde' to fiev Kara r-qv irpos aAArjAa p.tye- 



Tavrrj Set hit epov re /cai aov t6v 
\6yov inaivt6r]vai, cos to. heovra 

€ipr]KOT0i TOV TT01TJT0V, dXX' OVK 

ineivrj fxovov, ort o~a(pr) /cat arpoy- 
yv\a /c.r.A. 

5- Mtjkovs re 7rept — e'XXet\^ecos] 

For an application of the fol- 
lowing idea, cf. Legg. 4, 719 d : 

ovaiqi yap rcKprjs Tr]s nev VTTepjSe- 
(3\r]ix€vr)s ttjs oe eWenrovarjs Tr)s 
Se p-erpLas. lb. 722 a : ret yap 
/3e'Xrtora, uAV ov ra (3paxvTciTa 
oboe ra prjKrj TLprjreuv. Tim. 82 
a : to tu>v voaa>i> odev ^vviaTarai, 

8r)\6i> 7rov /cat iravTi yrjs 7rvpos 

v8aT0S re /cat depos, tovtcov f] 
irapa (pvaiv 7rAeove£ta /cat eVSeta. 
Theaet. I 7 2 e : /cat 81a pa<pa>v rj 
(3paxeoiv pe'Aet ouSev Xe'yeip, av 
p.6vov ru^cocrt row 6W0?. 

6. 77 y<ip 7tou] So the Bodl., 
with T3 : cett. rj. 

perpTiri/cr;] Cf. Phileb. Sllb 

fin. The fii'st mention of pe- 
TprjTtKr) is in the Protagoras, 
where it has not been suffi- 
ciently observed that the 'utili- 
tarian' hypothesis is only used 
as a means to bring Protagoras 



to acknowledge that virtue is 
science. Thus expediency is 
the point of transition from 
the arbitrary to the just, as in 
Theret. 178 to axpiXipov is the 
point of transition from the 
apparent to the real good. 

9. duo peprj] For the accus., 
cf. Hdt. VI. IOO : eqbpoveov 81- 
(paaias I8eas. 

10. TTpOS Ci] I. C 7Tp0C- T0VT0 0. 

Cf. Theaet. 1 7 7 e : tovto SV ttov 
CTKccpp av ei'77 irpos o \eyopev. 

1 1 . 07177] Sc. Siaipereov. Cf. 
Soph. (Ed. Tyr. 926, Aj. 103, 
874. 

12. The words tt]v irpos a\- 
Xrj\a peyedovs /cat crpt/cpoYfiros 

Koivwvlav are not free from 
doubt. For they may mean 
either "the mutual communion 
of greatness and littleness," 
(where the article seems to be 
required,) or " the participa- 
tion (of things) in greatness 
and littleness relatively to one 
another." The latter is right ; 
although the former meaning 
may not unnaturally suggest 



riOAITIKOS. 



101 



183. QoVS KGU O-fllKpOT-qTOS KOIVCOVLOLV, TO $€ KCLTU TlfV TT]<i reference to 

/ » / » / the stand- 

yeveatcos avayKaiav ovaiav. ardofwhat 

NE. 20. Y\co$ Xeyei? ; \]„\ >iore 

37E. 'Ap ov Kara (Pvcrii> SoKel croi to fxeitpv i£ Much. 

fjLr)8evbs eTepov $eiv fxeitpv Xeyetu 77 tov cXolttov oy, 5 
c koll tovXclttov av tov fieitpvos eXuTTOv, aXXov <5e 

/jLi]8ei>6? ; 

NE. 20. ,r Epoty€. 

aE. TV fie ; ro Tr)i> rou fxeTplov (fyvcriv vnep- 



itself to a reader of the So- 
phist, where the Koivcovia chiefly 
spoken of is the mutual com- 
munion of ideas. Compai-e 
with this whole passage Phajdo 
100, 10 1. Note that to pel&v 
= to peye'dovs kolvcovovv irpbs to 
e'XaTTOv. And to eXaTTOV = to 

aplKpOTTjTOS KOiVCOVOVV ITpOS TO 

p.a.£ov. 

1. to 8i — oho-iav\ These 
words are meant to be enig- 
matical, like the definition 
of rhetoric as ttoXitikijs popLov 
ei'ScoXoi/ in Gorg. 463 d, or as 

ttjs tcov e7ra>8S)V Texvrjs popiov in 
Euthyd.289e. (dvaTravXaydpTrjs 
crnov8rjs yiyverai eviore f) Traibid, 
Phileb. 30 e.) But they are 
less clearly explained in what 
follows. They seem to be 
connected with the assertion 
that a standard is necessary 
to the existence of the pro- 
ductions of art (infr. 284 a, 
b), and may probably be ren- 
dered " according to the other- 
wise impossible existence of 
production." avayKaiav is then 
used in the same sense as in 

Rep. 2, 369 e : e'lr] §' av rj dvay- 
KaioTaTr] noXis in TeTTapav tj irevre 

dv8pa>v. " A city could not 



possibly consist of less than 
four or five men." And ye'veo-is 
is a general word for the ope- 
rations of all the arts. Cf. 
Soph. 235 e, Phileb. 27 a. 
Compare Legg. 10, 903 d : 

KaTu. bvvap.iv ttjv ttJs Koivrjs yeve- 

o-fws. I. e. " So far as it was 
possible that both should be 
combined." Translate, therefore 
— " I divide the art of measur- 
ing in the following way. One 
part is determined by the fact 
that things partake of great- 
ness and smallness relatively 
to each other : the other by 
this, that without it the exist- 
ence of production would be 
impossible." A similar verbal 
use of the word oio-la occurs 
immediately below (e, oio-las) 
and in p. 285 b : yevovs twos 
ovcriq. The meaning of this 
passage will appear more 
clearly on comparing Phileb. 
25 d, 26 c. 

9. Tt hi; — dya6o\ ;] " But, 
again, shall we not say that 
there is really found that 
which exceeds or is exceeded 
by the nature of the Meet, in 
words, or, if so be, in deeds, 
and that herein consists the 



102 



IIAATQN02 



fiaXXov koll virepfiaXXopevov vtt avrys Iv XoyoLS eire p. 28 
koll eV tpyois dp ovk av Xe^opev coy ovtw yiyvo- 
p.€i>oi>, Iv cp kcu Siacjje'povcTi paXLura i]p.cov ol re kukoi 
kcu ol ciyaOol ; 
5 NE. 20. <baivtTcu. 

HE. Aittos apa Tcwrcvi overlap koll KplcreLs tov 
peyaXov koll tov apLKpov Oereoi>, aAA' ov\ cb? tyap.c-v 
apTL 7T/>09 aXXrjXa povov dew, aAA' cocnrep vvv elpr)- 
tcu paXXov rr\v p\v irpos clXXtjXol Ae/creW, rrjv 8 av 
loirpos to perpLOv. ov be eveKa, pLaOeiv dp av (3ov- 
Xolp.eda ; 

NE. 20. Tiiirjv; 



chief mark of difference be- 
tween bad men and good 1 " 
Compare Rep. 1, 349, where 
it is shewn that the good and 
wise man does not aim at 
" more" but at " what is 
meet." 

"When workmen strive to do 
better than well 
They do confound their skill in 
covetousness." 

(9.) tov fierpiov cpvo-iv] Com- 
pare the darepov (piais of the 
Sophist, the diSios cpvais of the 
Philebus, and the igaicpvrjs cpv- 
o~is of the Parmenides. The 
word cpvo-is expresses the more 
concrete or determinate con- 
ception of the Idea. 

6. AiTTas apa — 6ereov\ "We 

must therefore assume that 
great and small exist and are 
discerned in these two ways, in- 
stead of following what we just 
now said, that one must only- 
judge or speak of them (Sew 
sc. Kpipeiv implied in Kplcreis, 
or perhaps Xeyeiv from supr. 
d) relatively to each other : 



instead of this we must speak 
rather in accordance with what 
has just fallen from us, of one 
mode of their existence which 
is mutually relative, and of an- 
other which is relative to an 
ideal standard." The minute- 
ness of the antithesis, d\\u — 
obx — dX\a, and the explicit re- 
sumption of the first clause 
with the second d\\d, make the 
sentence rather tortuous, but 
the meaning is clear. In the 
words aXXa — Setf the chief pre- 
dicate is absorbed, as frequently 
happens, in the relative clause. 
Cf. Phileb. 54 d : oVep — einou 
— Seiz/. 

10. ov S' epeKa] Plato's dia- 
lectical subtleties have gene- 
rally an end beyond them- 
selves. Here the end is the 
vindication of the Arts, in 
order to establish an Art of 
Eule. Cf. Theset. 184 d : tov U 

tol eveKa avrd croi BiaKpificofiai. 

@ov\oip.fda.] The first per- 
son is used, as more gentle 
than the second. 



nOAITIKOS. 



103 



284. 3?E. Et irpos fiT/Sei* erepou tijv tov /JLeltjovos idcrei 

Tl? (j)VaiV TJ 77-/90? TOVACLTTOIS, OVK €<TTai 7TOT6 TTpOS TO 

jxtTpiov. rj yap ; 

NE. 20. Ovrm. 

SE. Qvkovv ras renvois re avras kcu rapya av- 
twv ^vpLTravra ^SioXovfiev* tovtco tco Xoyco, kcu 5?) 
kou T7)v (flTOV/Aevrjv vvv iro\iTiKi)V koll r-qv p-qOeicrav 
v(pai>TiKr]v a(paviovfiev ; awacrai yap al roiavral irov 
to tov pLCTplov TrXeov Kai eXaTTOv ovx coy ovk ov 
dXK coy bv \aXeKov irepl Tas irpa^us irapa^vXaT- 
b Tovari, Ka\ tovtod Srj tw Tpoirco to fitTpov crco^ovaai 
irdvTa dyaOd Ka\ KaXd aTrepyd^ovTat. 

NE. 20. T/ fxrjv ; 

££E. Ovkovv av TTju TroXiTiKTJv d<pavura)fi€V, airo- 



1, eacr€t] "Will admit." Sc. 
curat, to be supplied from eurai 
infr., for which ellipse cf. 
Theset. 195 d : dp(porepd ye kiv- 
bvvevei 6 ~hoyos ovk edaeiv (sc. eivai 
or alpe'io-dai). 

g. rds re^va? re] re is an- 
swered by Kai S17 Kai : avras Kal 
rapya avrutv ^vpiravra is epexe- 
getic of rexvas. 

6. * 8io\ovpev * ] MSS. Ste- 
Xov/zei/. The correction is due to 
Bekker. 

8. anao-ai yap ] Cf. Arist. 
Eth. Nic. V. 4, 12 : eVrt 8e Ka\ 
eVt rcov dXkav rex va)V rovro. av- 
■qpovvro yap av, el p.r] 6 ttoiccv koI 
bcrov /cat oiov K.r.A. 

IO. at ov ^aXe7ro^] " As being 
baneful." Badham objects to 
xaAe7roi> on the ground that 
this adj. placed absolutely can 
only mean " difficult to ob- 
tain :" and conjectures x a ^ e7r ^s 

napa<pv\drrovcri. But cf. 

Symp. 176 d: on x a ^ f7rov ro ' f 



dvBpamois 17 pedrj earl. lb. 204 : 
avro yap rovro x a ^- e7rov dpadia. 
Iufr. 308 a : Xa\endv etVej Kal 
beivov Trddos. For 7rapa(p. cf. 

Legg. 4, 715 a. 

The distinction between the 
two kinds of perprjrtKT] is not 
present in Protagoras, p. 357. 

cos ov ^aXe7roi' 7repi rds Trpd^eis 
7rapa(pv\drrovcri] vrepl rds Trpa£. 
has a double reference to ^aX. 
and Trapacp., like nepl rds — 81a- 
rpiftds supr. 283 c. Cf. Prot. 
313 d: 6 rt — 7rovt]pdv TvepX rd 
acopa. 

12. Tidvra — dnepyd^ovrai ] 
Compare the rhythm of Bep. 8, 

546 C : rrdvra 7rpon-rjyopa Kal prjra 
ivpbs a\\rf\a aTre^rjvav, and for 

the expression, Legg. 4, 7 1 1 d, 

6, 780 e : iravra dyaOd dnep- 

yd£erai. lb. 783 e. Tim. 50 e. 

14. dcpavlo-apev^ Cf. Soph. 
249 c: os av emo-T-qp^v — dcpavl- 
£ow la-xypi-irjrai irepi rivos 67177- 
ovv. 



5 Without 
such a 
standard 
as is here 
postulated, 
the arts 
and their 
produc- 
tions would 
be destroy- 

!0 ed, or ra- 
ther made 
impossible. 
For it is by 
keeping 
just mea- 
surement 
that the 
arts per- 
form their 
functions. 



104 



HAATQNOS 



po? rjfuv r) fxera tovto earai ^tyjctls tyjs fiaaiXiKrjs p. 

NE. 212. Kai fxaXa. 

aE. Ilorepof ovv, KaOarrep Iv tw aocfjiarr) 7rpocr- 
srjvayKacrapev eivai to fir) ov, eireiftr) Kara tovto c 
8ie(pvyev rj/xas' 6 Xoyo?, ovtco koll vvv to irXeov ad 
kcu eXaTTOv fieTprjTa tt poaavayKacrTeov yiyveaOat fir) 
77750? a'AA??Aa fiovov aXXa kcu irpos Tr)v tov fi€Tp(ov 
yevecnv ; ov yap 8r) SvvaTov ye ovre ttoXltlkov ovt 
loaXXov tlvol tcov Trepl to.? 7rpd£ei? eiriaT-qpLOva dva/i- 
(j)Lal3r)TrjTC09 yeyovevai tovtov pr) ljvvop.o\oyr}0evTO9. 

NE. 20. OvKOVV KOLL VVV O TL fiaXiaTa \pr) TOV- 
TOV TTOlflV. 

SE. TlXe'ov, co ~EcoKpaT€9, en tovto to epyov rj 
i^Keivo' kcli Tot KciKeivov ye [iep.vrip.eda to fir)K09 oaov 
r)v. aAA' v-KOTtQecydai plv to TOiovde irepi avTcov kol 
paXa hiKaiov. 



I 



4. iv ra o-o($i<TTf)\ " In treat- 
ing of the Sophist." A form 
of reference like iv rfj Trapa^oXrj 
twv fiicov, Phileb. 33 b: iv tov 
o-KTjTTTpov rfj napaSoaei. Thuc. 
I.IO. 

5. eW§7? — Xoyos] " Because 
at this point the question 
eluded our grasp." 

8. irpos — 77736?] There is a 
slight variation in the mean- 
ing of npos. " Not only in com- 
parison with each other, but 
with a view to the production 
of that which is meet." To 
perpiov is the result of the ap- 
plication of p.irpov to produc- 
tion. 

9. yevecriv] Cf. Slipr. 283 d. 

The frequent use of the word 
yevems, iii the most general 
is one of the character- 



istic points of diction which 
connect this dialogue with 
Philebus, Timasus, and Laws. 

ovr aXXov Tiva — yeyovevai] 
Eight MSS. (including the 
best) have tov, but t&v is pro- 
bably right ; because the ad- 
verb seems to require that 
iirio-TT]p.ova should be taken 
after yeyovevai. " Neither the 
Statesman nor any other artist 
of those concerned with action 
can be proved an artist beyond 
dispute." Cf. infr. 293 c : 

d\r]6cos irn(TTT]p.ovas Ka\ ov 80- 
Kovvras povov. 

14. UXiov — 77 'who] There 
is a further task indicated in 
Legg. 4, 719 e : o-oi 8' oix ovtco 

prjTeov, as vvv enres peTpiov elircov, 
dWa t'l to peTpiov Kai onoaov 
prjTeov. 



,84. NE. 20. To ttoIov ; 
d aE. Oy 7Tore derjaei rod vvv XeyOevros 777)0? rr\v 



nOAITIKOS. 



105 



2. 'i2? 7rore 8e>jcrei — earai 
Trore] It has been thought that 
this passage is seriously cor- 
rupt : but when 6 ti (or 6) is 
rendered as a pronoun, and 
either nai introduced before 
/j.el£uv, with six MSS., or re read 
for ti (or ri ti, with Hermann), 
the words as they stand give 
a better meaning, and one 
more suited to the context, 
than any which it has been 
proposed to substitute. " That 
some day there will be need 
of that which has now been 
mentioned" (the proof that 
"more" and "less" are relative 
to a standard of right measure 
as well as to each other, supr. 
b) "for the demonstration of the 
highest problem of all." (o.vto 
TCLKpifiis is that absolute prin- 
ciple which is essential to and 
identical with perfection of 
method. Cf. i Ale. 130 d: 
avro to avro). " But (to dwell 
only on) what is fairly and 
sufficiently shewn for our pre- 
sent purpose, this argument, 
I think, comes grandly to our 
aid, that we must alike believe 
in the existence of the arts, 
and at the same time (ap,a), 
in a greater and less being 
measured, not only in relation 
to each other, but with a view 
to the production of the mean. 
For if the latter is true the 
former is true (for eiceiva, cf. 
Theset. 207 d, avra, and note), 
and if the former exist, the 
latter is the case ; and if either 
is not, neither will ever be." 
This explanation is substan- 
tially the same as Stallbaum's. 



It appears from the Philebus 
that the absolute standard 
(jueVpoi/) was closely allied in 
Plato's mind with Reason and 
the Idea of Good. The de- 
monstration of the " very ex- 
actness of truth" is probably 
reserved for the " Philosophus." 
Even in the dialectical dia- 
logues Plato complains of an 
imperfect method. For n 
almost = o, = " a thing which," 
cf. Gorg. 508 d: 6 fi« Sij ep.bs, 
Bans TroXKaKis p.ev fj8r) e'lprjTai 
ovSev 8e KmXvei /cat en \eye- 
adai ov (jirjui K.r.X. The in- 
definite relative is used be- 
cause the antecedent is only 
determined as the sentence 
proceeds. " But as for that 
which," &c. And for the 
clause in apposition, cf. Theset. 
158 b : 6 TroWdias. infr. 293 a. 
A similar looseness of con- 
struction occurs in Gorg. 454c: 
dXX' tva \xt] 6avfjLa.crr]s — onep yap 
\eya> k.t.X. For the notion of 
a.KpL$eia, cf. Rep. 4,435 c-e, 504. 
Comp. esp. with npos ra vvv, 
435 d : tcov re irpoeiprjp,ev(i>v 
d£iws. 5°4 D : T ® v — efnrpocrdev 
eiYopevas dnodei^ets. For nep\ 

avro TaKpifih, cf. Rep. 7, 525 a: 
f] Tvep\ to ev p,d6r]o-ii. The Bod- 
leian has SeiKWTai, with most 
other MSS. 

The distinction here brought 
out obviously resembles and 
may have suggested that drawn 
by Aristotle in Eth. Nic. II. 
between the absolute and re- 
lative mean. But what is 
absolute in Aristotle is rela- 
tive in Plato. Aristotle's 
nXeov, eXctTTOv, kclt avrb to 



this in ;i 
harder 
piece of 
work than 
that. 



106 



IIAATON02 



We may 
content 
ourselves 

for the pre- 
sent willi 
I lie indirect 
proof, that 

if inoiv and 

Less are not 

i lnis mea- 
sured with 
reference 
to what is 
meet and 
proper, no 
art can 
ever exist. 
Hence we 
may pro- 
ceed to di- 
vide the 
art of mea- 
surement, 
making 
one seg- 
ment to 
consist of 



7T€pi avrb TUKpifie? uirbtieL^iv. o tl de irpos ru vvv 
kclAoos koll lkuvco? SeiKwrai, — Sokzl poL $or)6eiv /xe- 
ya\<m peirws yplv ovto<s b Aoyo?, go? apa rjyrjTeov 
bfioico? ra.9 re^va? Trdcras eivai [/tea] /JLe7(pv tl a/xa 
5 kcu eXoLTTOv li€t peia 6 ] ou pa) 777)0? aAA?;Aa povov aAAa 
KCLi Tvpo<i Ti]v tou peTplov yeveaiv. tovtov re yap 
ovtos tKeiva ccttl KrxKelvcov ovcrcov eart /cat tovto, 
fir] 8e ovtos TTorepou tovtcov ovSerepov avTcov ecrrai 

7TOT6. 

to NE. 20. Tovto p.ev opOoos' aAAa tl Sr) to p,€Ta 
tovto ; 

HE. Arjkou OTi Siaipo'ip.ev dv ttjv LieTpr]TLKr)v, 
KaOairep epprjOr/, tclvtt) 8i\a TepLVovTes, ev p.ev tl~ 
OevTts avTrjS pbpiov ^vpirdaas re^ay, birbaai rov 



p. 2» 



irpaypa are here viewed as 
Trpo? aXXrjXa \i6vov. Aristotle's 
•upas fjpas is Plato's 7rp6? ttjv 
rov fierpiov yeveaiv, where the 
appeal is to an absolute stand- 
ard. This difference strikes 
deeply into the character of 
each philosophy. Vid. supr. 
note on 259 b. It should be 
noticed that Plato does not 
speak of a mean in the former 
case, but only of excess and 
defect, and that Aristotle's 
subjective mean is connected 
with his distinction between 
virtue and the arts, which 
must be regarded as a forward 
step in ethical inquiry. Com- 
pare Legg. 5, 757 a (where we 
seem to find the point of tran- 
sition from the Platonic to the 
Aristotelian pecroTTjs) : to'is yap 
avlcrois tcl [era avicra yiyvoir av, 
el pf] Tvyxjxvoi tov perpov. 

2. (Sorjdelv peyaXoirpeTTws\ Cf. 
Theset. 168 C : peyaXeioTepov av 



toIs avrov e'l3orj6r](Tev. 

4. opolcos — yeveaiv ] Cf. 
Phajdo 76 e : els KaXov ye Kara- 
4>eiyei o \6yos, els to opolms eivai 
ttjv re ^v)(r}V rjpcov irp\v yevea6ai 
rjpas kuI ttjv ovaiuv r\v S17 av vvv 
Aeyets-. A direct proof of the 
existence of such a standard is 
still to seek. But it is enough 
for our purpose that no art 
can exist without it. 

pel£6v ti apa Kal eXaTT0v\ 

" There is a greater and less 
whose measure is not merely 
relative." I. e. This is one 
kind of "greater" and " less." 
But perhaps na\ should be re- 
jected and re read for ti. Cf. 
Theaet. 195 e : Xi6<o8es re. 
MSS. ti. 

8. iroTepov] " Either," " one 
or other." 

I 3. ev pev popiov — to 8' erepov] 

According to the reasoning of 
this passage, the former are 
clearly subordinate to the latter. 



I10AITIK02. 



107 



284. apL0pov /cat fxrjK-q /cat fia&rj /cat irXaTq /cat TayvT-ryras 
7rpo9 rovvavTLOv fierpovai, to <5e trepov, biroaai irpos 

TO ptrpLOV KOLL TO TTpeiTOV KOLL TOV KOLLpOV KOLL TO SeOV 

koll ttclvO' onoaa el? to fieaov uTrcpKLaOrj tcov kcrya- 

TCQV. 

NE. 20. Rat pLtya y eKOLTepov Tprjp,a eiVey, /cat 
iroXv 8ia(f)epov aXXyXoLu. 

SE. *0 yap 6vlot€, co 2co/c/)ares > , olopevoL 8rj tl 

285. aotyov (ppcttJELv iroXXol tcov KopL\j/cou Xeyovaiv, coy 
apa peTprjTLKT] Trepl ttolvt ecrrt tcl yiyvop,ei>a, tovt 
clvto to vvv XtyOlv ov TvyyavtL. pLeTprjaecos pev yap 
Sr) TLva Tpoirov ttolvO* birocra evTtyya pteTelXr/cpe' Slol 



t. Taxvrr]Tas] The Bodleian, 
with A EII 2, has iraxvTrjTas, cf. 
infr. 299 e, where the intro- 
duction of Traxe(TLV would be 
more intelligible than of na- 
XvrrjTas here, but the MS. au- 
thority is slight. The tran- 
sition from solid quantity to 
speed is less obvious and more 
Platonic and philosophical than 
that from depth and breadth 
to thickness : and density 
(which Stallbaum speaks of) 
can hardly be in question. See 
the connexion between solid 
geometry and astronomy (o>s 
(popav ovcrav jiadovs) in Rep. 7, 

528 foil. See esp. 529 d: t£>v 

S' aKrjdLvuiv iroXii c'vdeiv, as to bv 
rdxos kcu r) ovo~a (3pa8vTi)s iv tg> 
d\rjdt,va> dpiBpca Ka\ ttclo-l to'is 
akrjBivols cr^jj/iacri (popds re Trpos 
a'XA^Xa (peperai Kcii tci ivovra 

(pepei. Where the distinction 
of the two kinds of astronomy 
is essentially analogous to that 
suggested here. Also Legg. 7, 
820 sqq., 10, 896 d : prjKovs 
o-a>pd~cov Ka) n\drovs kcu ftddovs 
kci\ pcSfJLYjs. 



4. dnaiKicrdr]] " Have removed 
their abode" — as to a safe dis- 
tance from evil. The word 
seems to have been adopted 
by the Pythagoreans. See 
Mullach. Pyth. Fr. p. 537 : ov 

pa<pdv ou8' dnaKicrpevcos. (Ec- 
phantus ap. Stob.) 

9. 7roXAoi Twv Kopy\ra>v\ Evi- 
dently the Pythagoreans, who 
are spoken of in similar terms 
in Gorg. 493 c : Kop\j/os dvrjp, 
icrcos 2iKe\6s tls rj 'ItoKckos. Crat. 
405 d : 6Vt TavTa ndvTa, as 
(paaiv 01 Kop^rol nep\ povcriKijv 
kcu daTpovopiav, appovlq rivt tto- 
Aei apa ttuvtu. 

11. to vvv \ex6ev] That there 
could be no yevecns without the 
p(Tpiov, which is the first em- 
bodiment of to peTpov, cf. 
Phileb. sub. fin. and 55 e. 

12. did 8e to pi] TrepiftdXrjTai] 

" But from never having been 
habituated to distinguish every 
subject of inquiry according to 
real forms, they not only jumble 
indiscriminately, from a notion 
that they resemble each other, 
these widely different things. 



which mea- 
sure the 
size and 

lllllllltlT of 

obj >■' 1 in 
relation to 
each other, 

and one of 
those which 
measure 
with refer- 
ence to a 
mean or 
standard. 
This is the 
truth which 
underlies 
the doc- 
trine that 
"all is 
measure- 
ment." 



r 2 



108 



FIAATQN02 



But, for 
want of the 
power of 
distin- 
guishing 
kinds, the 
authors of 
this doc- 
trine con- 
fuse the 
More and 
the Too 
Much, and 
elsewhere 
distinguish 
inoppor- 
tunely. 
Whereas 
one ought 
not to rest 
short of any 
real dis- 
tinction, or 



oe to fir) kclt etSrj avveiOlaOai (TKOTreiv diaipovfievovs 
ravra re toctovtov Siafa'povra ^vpfidAAovaiv evOv? 
eh tolvtov ofioia vofiio-avres, kou rovvavTiov av tov- 
tov Spaxitv, erepa ov Kara, fitpr) Siaipovvre?, Se'ov, 

5 qtclv /lev Ti]v tcov iroWcov tl? irportpov aurOrjTai 
Koivcovlav, /ir) 7rpoa(plaraa0aL irptv av Iv avrfj rd? 
Stafpopas' 'idy Trdcras, OTToaamep iv eldeai Kelvrai, ret? 
8e av iravToSairas dvo/iOLorrjTa?, orav iv 7rXr)0ecnv 
o(f)0cocri, /irj Svvarov elvai dvcrcoTrovfievov iraveaOai, 

io7rp\v av tjv/nravTa rd oiKela kvros fiias 6fioiOTr)T09 
cptja? yevovs rivos ovcrla. 7rept(3d\rjTaL. ravra yueV 
ovv wavco? irepi re tovtcov kcu 7rep\ tcov iXXelyj/ecov 



p. 28 



but fall into the converse error 
of distinguishing other things 
not according to their real di- 
visions : whereas the right way 
is, when one has first perceived 
a common nature running 
through a great variety of 
things, not to desist till one 
has seen all the differences 
which subsist within that na- 
ture, and which constitute dis- 
tinct kinds, and on the other 
hand, not to be able to look 
contentedly upon the endless 
diversity which has been seen 
in a multitude of objects, until 
one has brought all kindred 
objects within the pale of a 
single resemblance, and invest- 
ed them with the real nature 
of a single kind." 

I . to [xr] Kar' e'lSrj] Cf. Rep. 

5, 454 a, Phsedr. 265 e. 

5. orav Tn tcov iroKkfov — 
Koivcaviav] This " divinatio " 
seems always to be assumed as 
the first step in a dialectical 
inquiry. Cf. Phileb. 16 d: piav 

ibiav nepl nnvTOs €KaTTOTe 6epe- 
povs Cyre'iV ivpr)<rav yap evovfrav. 



7. oTroo-aurep] This is the 
same thing which is expressed 
in the Philebus (16 d, e) in the 
words p.k\pm(p av to Kar ap^as 
(V pi) 'oti ev koX TToWa xa\ ("nreipa 
icrn povov 'idrj tls, aWa kox 6n6o~a. 

iv e'lhecri KflvTaij Cf. Rep. 
8, 544 d : rjris nal iv e'lBei 81a- 
(fiavel tivl Ketrai. 

8. ev irXfidea-tv] "Numbers," 
or " multitudes," he cannot say 
classes because they are not 
yet classified. Cf. Theset. 157 c : 

a> 8rj ddpolapaTi avdpanrov re tl- 
devrat Ka\ \160v k.t.A., and the 

oyKoi of the Parmenides, 164, 5. 
This process corresponds to 
that described in Phileb. 18 a-d. 

9. hvo-o)TTovpevov\ " Looking 
upon with discomfort or dis- 
like." Cf. infr. 291 b, c. 

1 1, yevovs tivos ovcriq] " With 

the reality (dasein) of a genus." 
ovo-la is used in nearly the 
same sense as supra 284 bis. 

= tco yevos ti elvat. 

The latter half of this de- 
scription (from Tas 8i av) is the 
opposite of the second error 
mentioned above. 



nOAITIKOS. 109 

185. kou i>7T€p(3oXcov elprjadco' (f)vXaTTO)p,eu 8e povov on omit any 

c 860 yevrj irepl olvtol e^evprjTai tyjs p€Tpr)TiKr}? kou ralization. 

a (papev avr eivou pepLUcopeda. observation 

, by tne way. 

NE. 20. MepvrjcropeOa. Gramma- 

Ahi. Mera tovtov or) tov Xoyov erepov irpoaoe- 5 tdonehave 

j. / /i v , „ -v ' v \ / an end be- 

^copeua wept avrcov re rtov (r]Tovp.ei>a)V kou irtpi wot- yond them- 

S(*l Vt'S 

err;? 7-779 e^ TO?? roiolarSe Xoyoi? diarpifirj?. that of 



NE. 20. To 7roio^ ; 



making 
gramma 
rians. So 



Hp t"' » / e « \ v / nans, oo 

A£i. -ki rty avepotTO rjpas ttjv irept ypapp.ara the present 

nquiry hai 
m end be- 
yond itf 
that of 

d Tore <pa*p.€V yiyveaOou rrjv Zjyriqo-iv kvbs evtKa paXXov JSter S 

lecticians. 



/ ~ /1 ' « ' « inquiry has 

avvovcnav tcov pavuavovTGiv, ottoto.v tis otlovv 10 an enc i ij e . 

v »/i«/»n ' ' » « yond itself, 

ovop.a epcoTrjarj tivwv ecrrt ypappaTcov, irorepov avrcp 



tov 7rpoj3\i]0€VTO9 77 roD 7re/ot iravra tol 7rpo/3aXXo- 

peva ypappaTLKcorepcp yiyveo~6ou ; 

NE. 20. At}Ao^ ort roi> 7rep\ airavra. 15 

HE. TV K av vvv r)puv 7} wepl tov woXitikov 

<j]TY)cris ; eVe/ca olvtov tovtov irpofiefiXrjTai paX- 



1. ^lAarra^ei-] Let us fix of a relative clause becomes 

this in our minds. Cf. infr. absorbed in the antecedent. 

297 a: fxexpmep av ev peya cpv- " If we were asked of the in- 

Aarrwcm/ k.t.X. tercourse of learners with their 

9. Ei tis — yiyve crdai;] "Were teachers about their letters, 
one to ask us of the intercourse when one of them is asked of 
of students in grammar (with what letters any noun is com- 
their teacher), when one of posed, whether shall we say 
them is asked to spell a word, that his study at such a time 
whether shall we say that the is for the sake of the parti- 
inquiry in which he then en- cular question, or for the sake 
gages is for the sake of the of his becoming more expert 
single problem thus set before in such subjects generally 1 ?" 
him, or for the sake of be- Compare the structure of Soph, 
coming more expert in all 237 b : el o-Trovog 8e°i k.t.A. 
orthographical problems?" 1 o. avvova-iav is used in some- 

The question which is the thing of a technical sense, 

object of dvepoiro is to be 16. T* 8' av] For the punc- 

sought in irorepov (pwpev k.t.X., tuation, cf. Phaedr. 234 d : ri 

diich is the apodosis of the <roi (paiverai — 6 \6yos ; ov\ vntp- 



sentence : just as when part <pvi><> — tlpi-jo-Bai 



] 10 



riAATUNOS 



still less is 
such an art 
as weaving 
to be fol- 
lowed fru- 
its own 
sake. But 
(though 
few are 
aw T are of 
this) the 
highest 
things have 
no sensible 
mean 
through 
which they 
can be ex- 
plained, but 
are shadow- 
ed forth by 



Xov ?) tov 7T€p\ irdvra 8iaX€KTiK(oT(pois ylyve- p- 2b 
aOai ; 

NE. 20. Kai T0VT0 SvjXoV OTl tov Trtpi iroLvra. 

aE. 'H ttov tov rr/s v<j)ai>TiKr}<z ye Xoyov avTrjs 
r,ravTJ]s eveKa Oijpeveiv ovSei? av e'OeArjcreie vovv eyxuv. 
aXX\ oifjLUL, tov? TrXeiaTovs XeXrfiev otl toI$ fiev tcov 
ovtcov padlco? KarapLaOelv *aio-Or)Tal* rive? 6/J.oioTrjTe? e 
7re(f)VKacriv, a? ov8ev yaXeirbv SrjXovv, otclv clvtcov tl? 
(3ovXr}0r] tco Xoyov ciitovvti irepi tov parj /xera irpa- 
io y/jLarcou aXXct x M P^ Xoyov pafiico? ivdeitjacrOai' toi? 
8* av fieylaroLS 1 overt /cat ti /allot aTOL? ovk eaTiv e\8co- 
Xov ov8ev 7rpo? rov? avflpcoirov? elpyaafievov evapyco?, p. 28 
ov 8c-Ly6evTos tt/v tov 7rvv6avofievov \j/V)(i]v 6 /3ouAo- 
p.evo? a.7ro7rXr]p(oaaL, wpb? tcov alaOrjaecov Tiva irpocr- 



4. ? H ttov] This is not really 
inconsistent with Soph. 227a: 

rfj tcov Xoycov p(668(0 anoyyio-Ti- 
ktJs t) (fiap/JLaKOTrocriw: oi>8ev tjttov 
ovbe ti paXXov Tvy\avei peXov. 

In both cases it is the method 
alone which gives importance 
to the particular subject. 

6. dAA', olpai, — \eyopeva ] 

" But I think that it has es- 
caped most men, that, while 
some thiugs are endued with 
resemblances which are sensi- 
ble, and therefore easily known, 
which there is no difficulty in 
shewing, when one wishes to 
point out any of them (n un- 
derstood from nepl tov) to any 
one who asks about it, with 
no trouble, but easily, without 
argument, — there are also 
things, and those the greatest, 
and of priceless worth, which 
have no image wrought so as 
to strike human perceptions, 



by pointing to which he who 
would content the mind of 
an inquirer, shall fully satisfy 
him by imprinting this on 
some one of his senses. 
Wherefore one ought to study 
to be able to give and receive 
a rational account of every- 
thing, for things bodiless, which 
are the fairest and the greatest 
things, for the sake of which 
all that is now said is spoken, 
are made clearly manifest by 
reason alone." Cf. supr. 277 c. 

7. MSS. aloSrjTiKai. 

10. padicos KaTapa6a.v~\ Per- 
haps pqblois should be read, 
with Hermanu and Badham. 
Badham further conjectures ah 

ovbiv xakiTTov o tl av avTwv tis 
/3ov\rjdfj tco A. a. — evS(i£a(rdai. 

But the whole sentence is la- 
boured and pleonastic, so that 
there is little cause for omit- 
ting- an inconvenient word. 



nOAITIKOS. 



Ill 



86. appoTTOov, LKavcos 1 7rXrjpco(rei- 810 8ei /leXtTous Xoyov 
€ko,<ttov bvvcLTOv eivai 8ovvai KCti Seijaadar ra yap 
dacopara, KaXXiarra bvra kcu peyiara, Xoyco povov, 
aAAw 8e ovdan aacfrco? SeiKwrai, tovtoov Se kvexa 
iravr earl ra vvv Xeyopeva. pacov 8' iv toI? eXar- 
b roaiv 7] peXeri] ttclvtos iripi pudXXov ?) irep\ ra 
pelfa. 

NE. 20. KdXXiar eW 

SE. 'Oy roivvv yapiv airavO' rjpiv tout eppijOr] 
7rep\ rovrcdv, pLpr/adcopeu. 

NE. 20. Tivcov ; 

SE. TavTrj? re ov\ iJKiara avrrj? eW/ca r^y 
Svo"x<Ep€ias, r\v -fwepl-f Ti]v pcaKpoXoyiav rr\v irep\ 
tt]v v(fiai>TiKr)i> airebe^dpeOa ftvcryepm, fcai rr]v Trepl 



analogies 
which can 
only be ex- 
argument. 



Let us 
recal the 
io motive of 
this digres- 
sion. It 
was chiefly 
to calm the 
disquiet 
which we 
felt at the 
length to 
which our 



5. pdcov pdXXov 77] Cf. Pl*0- 

tag. 317 c: nai evXaffeiav tcivttjv 
oipat j3(\ti(o eKelvrjs eivai, to 6/j.o- 
Xoyelv pdXXov rj etjapvov eivai. 

12. Tavrr/s re — XeyotpevJ The 
construction is obscured by 
the attraction of the latter 
part of the sentence into the 
relative clause. Strict syntax 
would require TavTrjs re — kql 
7-775 (Svo-^fpet'as) irepl ttjv (paKpo- 
Xoylav} nep\ ttjv tov tmvtos k.t.X.: 

instead of which the latter 
clause, with what follows, is 
made to depend on dnedegapeda 
8vax e pus, with wdiich the re- 
mainder of the sentence, ewoovv- 

res — Kal eneTrX^apev k.t.X., is 

also connected. 

13. rjv + irepl + ttjv paKpoXo- 
yiav] Hermann suggests rjvnep. 
Wagner, Rheinische Museum, 
vol. xii. (1857) p. 309, prefers 
finep. This avoids the, collo- 
cation of the two accusatives, 
which is the objection to fjvnep. 



But fjv is unobjectionable. Cf. 
Soph. 264 b : ttjp TrpoadoKiav rjv 
e(pol3i]8r)p.ev, and note. Gorg. 

509 C : ravTTjv eivai ttjv ala- 
xLo~T-qv (Bofjdeiav pf] 8vvao-0ai j8o- 



r)6elv. Also Legj 



666 b 



ttjv — naididv, *]v toIs dvdpdmois 
iirinovpov ttjs tov yr]pa>s avarrjpo- 
rrjTos e8a>pr)0-aTO tov oivov cpdp- 
pattov. And nepl also may be 
defended if we suppose a7re- 

8ei-dpe8a 8vaxepa>s (sc. ttjv paK- 

poXoyiav) to be substituted for 
ibvo-xepdvapev. Such a change 
in the form of a sentence will 
not astonish the attentive stu- 
dent of these dialogues. 

Plato here seems determined 
to "bestow all his tediousness" 
on his critics, whoever they 
were. 

fiaKpoXoylav] " Lengthiness 
in argument," not in speech, as 
in Gorg. 461 d, alib. 

14. dne8e£dpe8a Sucr^epwy (sc. 

7-171/ pciKpoXoyiav) is unexpectedly 



112 



nAATONO^ 



remarks on 
weaving, as 
well as the 
m\ tliu hich 
preceded, 
and the 
discussion 
Oil tlie na- 
ture of the 
Sophist l had 
been Bpun : 
by shewing 
that length 
was not 
lengthinesa 
unless ex- 
ceeding 
what is 
meet. 



Tiju tov iravTos dveiXitjiv kcu tyjv tov ao(f)icrTOv p. 281 
iripi rr/s tov urj ovto? ovcrias, ivvoovvTes co? ^X e 
/ii]ko? irXtov, kcu eiri tovtois Sr) iracnv eireirXrj^aptv 
fjfuv avTois, SeiaavTe? prj irepiepya dpa kcu fxaKpa c 
5 Xeyotpev. iv ovv elaavOis prjdev Trct.o-yodp.tv tolov- 
tov, tovtcov eveKct ttolvtcov tol irpocrOev vcov eiprjaOcu 

NE. 20. Tolvt ecrTai. Ae'ye e£f}s uovov. 

HE. Aeyco tolvvv otl ypr) $V fJL€/xvrj/JL€vovs ifJL€ kcu 

10 ere tcov vvv elprjuevcov tov re yj/oyov eKtxaTOTe kcu 

kircuvov TTOieicrOcu fipayyTYjTOS dpa kcu pr]KOvs d>v civ 

del irepi Xeycop.ev, p.rj 7rpb? aXXrjXa tol p.r\Kr\ Kpi- 

VOVT€S, dXXd KCLTCC TO Tr)$ peTprjTLKY}? ptpOS, T0T6 

e(f>afi€U 8etv pLep.vrja6ai, irpos to irpeirov. d 

15 NE. 212. 'OpOm. 

HE. 06 TOLVVV OvSe 7T/00? TOVTO TTCLVTO.. 0VT€ ydp 



Substituted for ebvaxepdvapev '. 

hence the introduction of 
Trept. 

1. dvei\i£iv] Supr. 269 e. 
Ttjv (sc. fiaKpoXoyiav). 

tov ao(pi(TTOv 7rept] It is 

better to take Tre'pi thus with 
tov o-oqbio-Tov, in which case it 
can easily be resumed with the 
explanatory words tjjs tov prj 
ovtos ovaias. Otherwise the 
preceding dialogue would be 
referred to as 6 arocpurr^s, a 
form of reference which has 
no parallel in Plato. Cf. supr. 
284 b : iv ra o-ocpiaTjj, and 
note. 

6. tovt<ov — iravTav\ " The 
above-mentioned and all simi- 
lar arguments." 

13. Tore] Supr. 284, 285. 

14. u€pvr}a6cu] One is at first 
sight inclined to read perp«- 



o~0ai, after the conjecture of 
Schleiermacher, and to sup- 
pose that an error has grown 
out of fivr)o-8£)fxev, pepvrjpevovs 

above. But the text is seen 
to be perfectly sound when a 
comma is placed after fie/ivrj- 
o~6ai, and 7rp6s to itpiirov is thus 
joined with to. prjicr) KpivovTes. 
The opening of the next speech 
favours this view. And in 
support of ueuvrjadcu, cf. supr. 
284 c : vnoTLdeo-dai 10s ttots 8e- 
t](Tfi tov vvv Xf^^eVros. 285 b : 
(pv\aTTcopev — on 8vo yevrj Tr)s 
peTprjTcurjs — Ka\ a (papev avTas 
civai pep.vap.eda. N. 2. pepvrjo-6- 
peda. 

16. Ov Toivvv ov8e 7rpos tovto 

rrdvTa] " Not, however, even 
with a view to this in all 
things. The standard by which 
arguments are to be measured 



nOAITIKOS. 



113 



l86. irpos rr]v rjdovyv prjKov? apporrovTos ovdev 7rpoa8er}- 
aofxeda, ttXyjv el pa) irapepyov rC to re av 7rpb? 
Tijv tov TTpofiXrjQevTos ^Ttjaiv, cos' av parrra koll 
ra^iara evpoipiev, devrepov aXK ov npcoTov 6 Aoyos? 
ayairav irapayyeXXei, iroXv 8e paXiara Kai TTpcoTOVb 
tyjv p.e0o8ov auri]U ripcav tov kolt e\8r\ 8vvarov eivai 
o Siaipeii>, kou 8r) Kai Xoyov, av re 7rapLp.r)Kr)9 Xe\6e\s 



And yet 
qo< "meet 1 
for plea- 
sure, nor 

evi n Eor 
discovery, 

I. in Eor i be 

I ml ul dl 

relopiag 

tic.-il me- 
thod and 
of making 



is that which is becoming 
or suitable, not with a view 
to pleasure, or persuasion, 
or gracefulness, but to the 
awakening of reason and the 
furtherance of truth." Cf. 
Legg. 2, 655 C : \eyovcri ye ol 
jrXeio-rot povo-LKrjs opdoT-qra eivai 
rrju r]8ovi)v rals ^i^ais 7ropi£ovo~av 
SvvapiV dWa Toi/TO p.ev ovre av- 
€Ktov ovre oaiov to Tvapdnau (p6ey- 

yeo-dai. We might be disposed 
to conjecture navrrj, but wdvTa 
is used elsewhere adverbially. 
Soph. 233 a: cos elal Tvdvra ttuv- 
t<ov avrol ao<pu>Taroi. 

(16.) ovre yap — \6ya>v~\ "For 
first we shall have no need 
of a length that is suitable 
for pleasure, unless merely by 
the way : and our argument 
further enjoins that Ave esteem 
only as of secondary import- 
ance that which helps investi- 
gation and facilitates and 
hastens discovery, but that 
we should prize by far most 
highly, and in the first place, 
the method itself and the 
power of dividing according 
to the real species, and feel 
an interest in that discourse 
which makes the hearer more 
inventive, whether it be brief 
or interminable alike : more- 
over, that the man who blames 
lengthiness (d8o\eo-xiav) in this 



kind of intercourse, and is in- 
tolerant of circuitous digres- 
sions, ought not so cpiickly 
and all at once to have done 
when he has blamed the dis- 
course as long, but should con- 
sider that it is his duty to shew 
further that a shorter one woidd 
have made those conversing 
better reasoners, and would 
have improved their power of 
finding a mode of declaring 
realities by speech : all other 
blames aud praises, made with 
reference to any other stand- 
ard, our argument bids us dis- 
regard and to seem deaf to any 
such remarks." 

1. prjKOVS Cipp-OTTOVTOs] Cf. 

Phileb. 36 d : xa'ipeiv Set \eyeiu 
Tois ciXhovs prjK((Tiv rj Kai otcoovv 
twu Ttapa to irpoo-rJKOV Xeyopevcov. 

lb. 28 d. Rep. 5, 450 b, Legg. 
1, 640 a, b. 

2. TrXrjv el firj] See Lobeck 
ad Phrynich. p. 459, who ad- 
duces Ar. de An. I. 3 : tt'Ktjv el 
pfj Kara arvpftefiriKus. The greater 
frequency of the expression in 
later Greek throws some doubt 
on the few instances of it in 
Attic Greek which, like the pre- 
sent, have full MS. authority. 

to Te\ Sc. prjuos dppoTTOv. 

6. TT\v pedoBov — tov — BwaTov 
elvai] Cf. Ale. 115 b : Kara rfju 
eni\eipT]0'iv tov craxreu ovs eSet. 



1 14 



IIAATQNOS 



men inven 

Boners. 
To return, 

:,n,l apply 

our ex- 
ample. 

Kingcraft 
has been 
distin- 
guished 

from other 
artsof tend- 
ing ani- 
mals in 
herds. 
But there 
remain 
those arts, 
both opera- 
tive and 
assistant, 
which are 
found 
within the 
state. 



tov aKovauvra evpeTtKcoTepov aTrepyaip-jTut, tovtov p- 
airovbd^Lv kcu tu> /jli]K€l firjdev dyavaKTelv, av r av 
fipa)(VT€po?, axravTW eri 8 av wpo? tovtol? tov 
nepl ra? TOtdaBe orvvovcrlas \j/eyovTa Xoyoov pyKr) 
5 kcu ray ev kvkXco rreptodovs ovk dirodexoLievov, otl 

)(py) TOV T0L0VT0V fXY] TTOLVV TU)(V pL1]8 6v6vS OVT00 

peOievai xj/e^avra \xovov cos" fxaKpd to. XeyOevTa, aXXa p. 
kcu 7rpoo-a7ro(paLveiv oiecrOai Selv oos fipayyTepa av 
yevofxeva tov? avvovTas direipyd^eTO SiaXeKTiKcoTe- 

io povs Kal Trjs tcov ovtcov Xoyco Si^Xcocreaos evpeTiKcoTe- 
povs, tcov <5e aXXcov koll irpos aXK aTTa \j/6ycov Kal 
eiraivcov Lirjbev (ppovTiQiv Lir/8e to irapditav aKOveiv 
SokeIv tcov toiovtcov Xoycov. Kal tovtcov fxev aXts. 
el Ka\ cro\ TavTjj ijvvdoKel' Trpbs Se 8r) tov ttoXltlkov 

i$\cQLiev iraXiv, tt)s 7rpoppr)de[ar)9 ixpavTLKi]^ avTco <pe- b 
povTts to 7rapd8eiyfAa. 

NE. 212. KaAco? eiireS) ko! 7roicop.ev a Xeyeis. 
SE. Ovkovv cctto ye tcov 7roXXcov 6 fiacriXevs ocrac 



1 . tovtov crnovbd^e iv\ This 
construction appears in Gorg. 
500 C : ov ti av fiaXXov o~7rov$d- 
o-eie Tis, as well as in Soph. 
251 c, 259 c Compare L egg. 

7 , 7 9 2 c : ° j^" y a p epos 8r] 
Xoyoy ov6" fjdovds (prjat 8e2v bicoKeiv 
tov 6p8bv j3lov ovt av to napdwav 
(jievyeiv tus Xvnas, dXX' ai/TO 
do-na£eo-8ai to p.e'crov, o vvv 6>; 
Trpoaelnov cos iXecov ovoiidaas. 

2. av t av ftpaxvTepos] Sc. 
"XexOeis. 

3. tov — \j/eyovTa] We seem to 
detect in these words an apolo- 
getic tone. Comp. Gorg. 453 b. 

5. oTi xph T0V toiovtov] These 
words depend immediately on 

6 Aoyos rrapayyeXXa. 

6. irdvv Taxv] Bodl. TTavTa\v. 



7. peBUvai] Cf. Phileb. 16 e : 

els to aneipov peBevra x ai P el - v eav. 

IO. Trjs — 8r)Xcoarecos] This is 
probably a genitive of respect. 
Xoyco depends on the verbal 
meaning in SrjXcocrecos. 

1 2. <ppovTi£eiv again depends 

On napayyeXXet. 

15- avTco (pepovres to napd- 
8eiyp,a ] " Applying to him 
( = imcpepovTes) out example." 
Cf. supr. 278 e. The dative 
is probably dativus commodi, 
" Bringing for his benefit." 
Hence there is perhaps a touch 
of liveliness in the omission of 
the preposition. 

I 8. Ovkovv and ye tcov noXXtov] 



Supr. 



'6 a. 



ocrat £vvvop.oc] Sc. Te^ac. 



nOAITIKOS. 



115 



287. £vvvo/ioi, fiaWov 8e diro iraawv tcqv rrepi rds dye'Aas 
8LaKe\(opLaraL. Xolttcu 8e', (jyapev, at Kara ttqXlv av- 
ttjv rcov re IjvvaiTiGov koll tcov alrlcov, as irpwras air 
dXXrjXoov Siaipereov. 

NE. SO. 'Op6m. 

HE. OlaO' ovv otl ^(aXe7rbv auras rep.elv dl^a ; 
to 5' a'lTiov, cos olpai, irpoiovaiv ov\ lyrrov earat 
kot agaves. 

c NE. 20. OvKOVV XPV $Py- v 0VTCD9. 

£?E. Kara /xe'A?; roivvv avrds olov iepehv diaipoo- 
p.e$a, e7ret8y St.)(a dSvvaTovpev. del yap els rov eyyv- 
rara o rt paXuna re/xveiv dpiOpbv del. 

NE. 20. Yloos ovv 7roLcofiev rd vvv ; 

S?E. 'Qcrirep epnvpoudev, b-nbcrai irapelyovTO op- 
yava irepl ttjv v(j)avTiK7jv, irdaas Sr}7rov Tore eriQepev 
cos avvaiTiovs. 

NE. 20. Na/. 

SE. Kal vvv Sr) ravTov pev tovto, en 8e ptaXXov 



10 These, for 
reasons 

which will 
appear as 
we proceed, 
do not ad- 
mit of di- 
chotomy, 
but must 
be carved, 
1 5 like a sacri- 
fice, in 
several 
joints. 

There are, 
first, in- 
struments : 



" That occupy part of the same 
field :" with a slight etjmiolo- 
gical allusion to fopevTiKt], The 
comparison of infr. 289 b shews, 
however, that the word is not 
to be taken actively or accented 
£vvv6[ioi. 

7. to 8' aiTLOV — Kara<fiaves] 

I, e. The enumeration itself 
(avTr) fj BiegoSos) will shew that 
the analysis cannot be carried 
further. 

9. 8pav ovras] npo'ievai. 

10. olov Upelov] Cf. Phsedr. 
265 e : Ka\ prj enixcipe'i-v Kara- 
yvvvai pepos pr]8ev kcikov payetpov 

Tponco xpwpevov. The same image 
occurs in Emped. Fr. 1. 86 : 
yva>6i 8iarpi]6evTus ivi anXdy- 



xvoio-i Xoyoto, with a further 
allusion to divination. 

11. Set yap] Cf. once more 
Phileb. 16 d : 8vo, etnas elai, 
o-Koireh, el 8e prj, rpels fj tlv liXXov 
apidpov. 

15. 8f)7rov] Bodl. 8e TTOV. 

1 8. TCIVTOV peV TOVTO, STl 8£ 

paXkov] For the slight inex- 
actness of pev and 8e, cf. The«t. 
150 b : to pev t<j)v paicov Toaov- 
tov, eXaTTOv 8e tov e'pov 8pdpciTOs. 

%ti 8e paXXov] Because they 
are no less indispensable, and 
are still less to be confounded 
with the art itself. Cf. Bep. 

2, 370 C : 6 yap yecopyos, cos 
eoiicev, ovk ovtos TroirjcreTai eavroo 
to ciporpov k.t.X. 

Q 2 



1 l(i 



riAATONOS 



y rod' yplv iroirjTtov. oaai yap apiKpbv i) peya tl p. 28 
8i]/j.iovpyov<Ti Kara. iroXiv opyavov, Oereov airaaas (l 
ravras co? ovcras auvaiTiov?. avev yap tovtcov ovk 

CLV 7TOT6 ytVOLTO TToXlS 0V$€ TToXlTLKT), TOVTCOV 6° ai) 

5 (3aai\iKr)? epyov Tt)(yr]? ovdev irov 6r]o~op.ev. 

NE. 2a Ov yap. 

HE. Kal pev 8rj ^aAe7rov £irL)(eLpovp.€V hpuv 
a.7ro-)(top'i-{pvTes tovto dwo tcov aXXcov to yevos' 
o tl yap ovv tcov ovtoov * eanu coy * eVoy y( 
10 TLV09 opyavov tiirovTa SoKelv eiprjKtvaL tl inQavdv. 
ojitcoy <5e tTepov av tcov iv ttoXcl KTrjpaTCov eL7roop.ev e 
ToSe. 

NE. 212. To iToiov ; 

SE. 'Oy ot»/c eo-n TavTT)v ttjv hvvap.iv e)(ov. ov 



4. tovtcov 8' aw — ^cro/xei 1 ] 

" Nor, again, shall we rank 
any one of these things as a 
function of the regal art." 

9. o tl yap ovv — ividavov ] 

The words as they stand in 
the MSS. {cos eariv evos ye tl- 
vos opyavov) give no construc- 
tion to SoKelv. Stephanus 
read ecm for 6,n, which can- 
not be spared. Ast supplied 
Set ; Stallbaurn, avay^ ; Her- 
mann omits cby ; Wagner, in 
Eheinsch. Mus. vol. xii. (1857) 
p. 307, reads So/cel. The com- 
parison of Legg. 4, 709 b — to 8' 
efori nepl re vavTikiav Ka\ Kvfisp- 
vrjTiKTjv Ka\ laTpiKrjV Ka\ crTpaTrj- 
yiKrjv ncivTa TavT eiTTOi'Ta ooKe.Ii/ 
eu XeyeiK. aXXa yap ollolcos koX 
roSe eon Xeyorra eu \4yeiv — 
leaves no doubt that Hermann's 
(which is nearly that of Ste- 
phanus) is the right method. 
But as is to be retained by 
being placed after eariv. Cf. 



Legg. 6, 768 C : a 817 cpap.ev oid' 
cos dp^as ovd' cos prj pqdiov el- 
TTovTa dvup.(pio-(3r]Tr)Tcos elprjKevcu. 
Crat. 404 b : Ar/prjTTjp <PalveT<u 
— cos pr}Trjp Kc-Kkrjadai, and supr. 
eTi6ep,ev cos crvvaiTiovs, infr. 289c, 
291 a, supr. 281 a, b, Phasdo 
99 b. For the position of eo-rt, 
cf. Legg. 6, 769 c : olds re els 
to irpocrQev eorcu (paibpvvcov ttoi- 
elv eni8i86vai. Bodl. MS. cos e'crri 
without accent. 

1 1 . e'iircopev To8e] " Let US Say 

what follows regarding another 
of the possessions that are in 
a city." "Say what?" "That it 
has not this power" (i. e. is not 
iroXiTiKr). Cf. infr. : Kal ttj C T ) T01 '- 
p-ivrj ye npocrr^Kov ovhev dre)(vcos 

emo-Tr]prj). " For it is not com- 
pacted with a view to being 
employed in production, as was 
the case with the genus instru- 
ment, but for the preservation 
or retention of what has been 
made." 



nOAITIKOS. 



117 



87. yap €7ri yevecrem alria 7rr)yi>vTai, KaOdirzp opyavov, 
aAA' eW/ca rod SypuovpyijOevros arcoTrjpias. 

NE. 20. To ttoZov ; 

SE. Tovro o Sr) ijypoi? kcu vypois [kol epirvpois 
kcu airvpoi$\ TravToSawov eiSo? epyaaOev, dyyeiov 5 
"j~b Srff fiia KArjaei irpootpOeyyoiieOa, kol paXa ye 
avyyov ddos kol rfj ^rjTOup.evrj ye, coy olficu, rrpoa- 
$88. yjkov ovbev dre^vm eTnaT-qpy). 

NE. 20. ricoy ydp ov ; 

37E. Tovtgw Srj rpirov erepov eiSos KTr/parcov 10 
7rdfjL7ro\v koltotttIov ire^bv kol evvSpov kol ttoXv- 



Thinlly, 
platforms, 

or vehicles : 



I. e7Tt yevecrecos atrt'a] " Pro- 
ductionis causa." inl as in eVi 
rex v ll pavddvei. alria as 111 
hv ot) av irepi air lav e^et? 8ia- 

ipepeiv. I. e. With the view of 
having production referred to 
them. 

4. Tovto — 7rpoa(pdeyy6pedaj 
This place also appears easilyre- 
medi able by rejecting the second 
6 8rj, which is either a gloss or a 
clerical error. Stallb. is wrong 
in saying that two arts must 
be developed here. (How would 
he distinguish ipyaXeiov from 
opyavov '?) The opyavov has been 
already distinguished, though 
with difficulty, as a separate 
kind, being lightly passed over 
because already spoken of under 
vcpavriKT), and that here named 
(dyyelov) has been previously 
spoken of as erepov, " a second." 
The next is therefore properly 
introduced as rpirov. 

[kgu epTrvpois Ka\ dn-upoic]] 

For things prepared by fire 
and not so prepared. Thus 
caldrons and pitchers are both 
included. In Legg. 3, 679 a, 



ctkcvcov epirvpcov re nai airvpcov, 

the distinction is made between 
pottery and wickerwork, the 
former of which is baked and 
will bear heat. 

9. Tlcos yap ov;] Sc. e'mcopev 
cos ovk ion ravrrjv rr)v ovvap.iv 

'4x°v. This form of assent to a 
negative proposition has been 
questioned, and ttcos yap, itcos 
yap ovv, ncos yap civ, suggested. 
But for a similar inexactness 
in reply, if this be inexactness, 

cf. Gorg. 467 e : T Ap' ovv ecrn 
Tt, rcov ovrcov, o ou^i rjroi dyadov 
y eo~r\v i] Kaicov r) pera^v rovrcov, 
ovre ayaOov ovre kokov ; II. 7roAAi) 
avdyKTi, co 2. (sc. pr) elval Tt rcov 
ovrcov o etc.) 

1 O. Tovrcov 81) — ycyvopevov ] 

" And there is a third kind 
of possessions, different from 
these and very extensive, which 
we must descry, on land and 
on water, perambulatory and 
stationary, honourable and dis- 
honoured, to which one name 
is given, because it is always 
intended to be sat upon, and 
is a seat for some one." 



sports 



1 1 8 I1AATQN02 

7rXave$ kou dirXaves koll ti/xlov koll utl/xov, ev oe p. ->!• 
wofj-a e'xov, 8lotl irdv Ivskol tlvos €(jje8pa? earl, Oolkos 
dei tlvl yiyvofxevov. 
NE. 20. To irolov ; 
5 HE. ' O^ifpa avro ttov Xeyopev, ol> Tra^f ttoXltl- 
Kr/? epyov, dXXa pcaXXov ttoXv tcktovlkt]? koll Kepa- 

LiLKT]? KOLL Xa7\K0TV1TLKr)S. 

NE. 20. MavOavoo. 
Fourthly, ££E. T7 oe rerapTOV : dp' erepov elvou tovtidv }> 

defences; / , T x „/,■„/ , 

ioAeKreo^, eV co tol TrXeiara iari tcov iraXai prjdevTcov, 
eadrjs re ^vpiraaa koll tcov 07rXcov to 7roXv koll rel)(r] 
ttolvtol 0' oaa yr/iva 7repil3XrjLiaTa kou XiQiva, koll 
fxvpia erepa ; TrpofioX-qs 8e eW/ca {jvLnravTcov avTcov 
elpyaapievcov diKouorar dv oXov irpoaayopevoiTO irpo- 

i5/3A?7pa, kou 7roAAc5 piaXXov reyyiqs oiKoSopuKrjs epyov 
kou v<pai>TiKrj9 to ttXucttov volllC^olt dv bpOorepov r) 

TToXlTLKYj?. 

NE. 20. Yldw pL€V OVV. 
Fifthly, AE. YlefXTTTOV 8e dp OLV £6eXoiLl€V TO TTtpi TOV C 

ioKoap.ov kou ypa(f)iKT)v Oeivai kou oaa tclvty) irpoa^pco- 
fjLeva kou pLovatKrj LiiLirjLiaTa TeXeiTcu, irpo? to:? r)8ova? 



I. rifiiov Kai ciripov] Cf. rrpo- g. Tt 8e Teraprov;] Cf. Gorg. 

e8pia, Trpcorov £v\ov. Horn. II. 474 C: rl he 8r/ alo-\iov ; norepov 

M. 3II : TeTiprjpeada paXiara k.t.'X. 

eSpy re Kpiaalv re K.r.A. Dio IO. t£>v Trakai prjdevrav] Supr. 

Cass. 58, 18 : eopat. re anpoi Kai 279, 280. 

crraaeis iirovdbiaTOi. 1 1. tcov oirhav to 7roAii] I. e. 

6. paWov 7roXu] Cf. supr. Defensive armour. 

275 c, and note. 16. to w\f7o-Tov] " Most," 

K(papiKr]i\ The exact bear- not " all." Not 6-n\oirouKr], for 

ing of this would be more evi- example. 

dent if we knew more of the 6p66repov pleonastically re- 
details of Greek life. sumes ttoKv paXXov, as suiting 

7. x a ^ K0TV7riK 'i s ] By which better with vopi^oir av. 
chariots, for example, are made. 



flOAITIKOS. 



11!) 



1I288. fxovov n)fjLcoi> aTreipyao-fitva, SiKaicos 0" av bvofxari 
TrepiXrjCJiOevTa kvi ; 

NE. 2Q. Uotcp ; 

SE. Yiaiyvibv 7rov tl Xeyerai. 

NE. 20. 17 ixr]v ; 5 

SE. Touro Toivvv tovtoi9 ei> bvofia anraai 7rpe\j/€i 
irpoaayoptvOeV ov yap cnrovdrj? oiideu olvtwv xapiv, 
aXKa 7rai8La? evtKa iravra hparai. 
cl NE. 20. Kai tovto cr^eSo^ en p.av6dv(o. 

3?E. To Se 77W4 tovtois aco/iara irape^ov, e£ &v 10 
/cat eV o!y 8r)piovpyov(riv biroaai twv re^vcov vvv ei- 
prjvrat, 7ra.vT08a.7rbv elSo?, ttoWwv irepcov reyvcov 
tKyovov ov, ap oi>x Iktov 6y]aop.ev ; 



Sixthly, 

materials, 
(which 
should 
have been 

put first :) 



4. HaLyviov tvov tl] "There 
is such a word in use as 
'child's-play.'" Cf. Soph. 226 
b : Xeyofiev. We have here 
the larger kind, of which p.i- 
fxrjrtKrj is part. Cf. Soph. 234 
b : natdias he ex els tf Tl Te X vl ~ 
Kwrepov t) Kai xapu'&Tepov eihos 

1) TO pipTJTLKOV j 

IO. To he nao-L tovtois awfiaTti 
napexov] This (if earlier than 
the Timseus) is probably a 
nearer approach than philo- 
sophy had hitherto made to 
the distinction of matter and 
form, of which the doctrine of 
elements in the earlier Greek 
philosophy was the anticipa- 
tion. The aneipov of the Phi- 
lebus (see esp. 25 c) is a more 
abstract mode of the same 
conception, taken from Pytha- 
gorean philosophy (cf. ib. 54 c: 

yeveo-ecos p.ev eveKa (pappaKa tc 
/cai wdvTa opyava Kai Trdo~av vkrjv 
TvapaTiOeadaL iracnv) : and the 

notion of formless matter oc- 



curs once again in the Timseus, 
in a passage of which the germ 
may be found in the text, 49 a: 

vvv 8' 6 Xoyoy eoiKev elaavay- 
Ka£eiv x a ^* 7 > ov Kai apvhpbv eihos 
emxeipe'iv Aoyoty ep.<pav'io~ai. Tiva 
ovv 'e\ov hiivap.lv Ka\ (pvcriv avTO 
VTroXrjTTTeov j TOidvhe p-dXiaTa, 
Tvdo-rfs eivai yevecrecos vTrohoxrjv 
avro, oiov Ti6rjvr)v K.r.A. Cf. Ar. 
Pol. I. 3 (8) : Ka), el v7rrjpeTiK7], 

TTOTepOV CDS Tj KepKlhoTTOUKT] TT] 

vfyavTiKi], rj cos t; x n ^- KUV Py LK ^ T .7 
dvhpiavTOTToua' ov yap coaavTcos 
vnrjpeTovo'iv, aXX f] pev opyava 
7rape^et, 17 he tt)v v\tjv. Xe'yco he 
vXtjv to vnoKeipevov, e'tj ov tc 
aTTOTeXelTai e'pyov, oiov iicpdvTjj 
p.ev epia, dvhpiavTOTroicp he ^nA«dV. 

11. ev oh] Matter is that 
in which art works as well as 
out of which art produces. Cf. 
Phileb. 59 d : Kaddnep hrjpiovp- 
yols fjpiv, e£ cov i] iv ois hel 
hrjpiovpye'tv ti, TrapaKeloSai. 

12. noXXcbv eTepcov rexveov eK- 

yovov ov ] Hence it appears 



320 



flAATQNOS 



NE. 2Q. Uolov 81) \eyeis ; 

3;E. X/oucrof re /ecu apyvpov kgli ttolvO oirocra 
peraWeveTai, kou oaa 8pvoTO/JUKrj kou Kovpd ^uparacra 
T€fxvovcra irapiyei T€ktovikt) kou TrAeKTiKr), kou kri 
5 ([)XoLariKrj (j)vTa>i> re kou e/x\|/u^a)^ Sep/iara awp.drow 
Trepioupovaa aKVTOTopuKT], kou octou 7rep\ ra tololvt 
elal riyyou, kou (f)e\\cov kou (3v(3Aooi> kou 8eap.wu 
epyacTTLKai, irapeayov 8-qpiovpyuv avvOtra e'/c p.rj 
crvvTiOefitvcDV €'i8r] yevwv. eV -5e avro irpoaayopevu>fxev 
\ottolv to TrpaiToyeves dvOpojirois Krrj/jLa, kou dtvvOtrov 
kou /3a<riAiKr]? en-KTrrj/Ar)? ovSapLw? epyov ov. 



that matter is a relative no- 
tion : for which thought, see 
also Tim. 49 b, c. 

2. Xpvaou yevcov ] "I 

mean gold and silver and 
all mineral productions, and 
all that wood-cutting and 
eveiy sort of cutting provides 
for the arts of carpentry 
and plaiting ; and all wherein 
the process of harking, ship- 
ping off the cuticle of plants, 
and the currier's art, denud- 
ing animals of theirs, and the 
other arts connected with such 
produce, that manufacture 
corks and papyrus and fasten- 
ings, provide for the manufac- 
ture of composite species from 
simple kinds." Note the rhythm 
of the concluding words. 

The structure resembles 

Soph. 227 a : Ka\ t5>v d\l/i>xc0V 
aiopdraiv (icaOapiTcis) , hv yuacpev- 
tikt] kci\ £vpirao~a KocrprjTtKi) rrjv ini- 
jxiXaav TrapexopevT] Kara apiKpa, 
7roAAa Ka\ yeXola 8okovvtci ovdpara 

e<T)(6v. So here : /cat (pXoio-TiKr] 

nepiatpovcra K.r.A. Trapto~)(ov. 

The words from <a\ downwards 



are part of the relative clause, 
though not to be construed 
strictly with oaa. Compare 
the order of words in Legg. 6, 
779 d : irdpra baa 8i8aaKa\el.a 
KareaKevuapeva Trepipevei toiis 
<poiTT]Tds Ka\ 6earas Oiarpa. lb. 
873d: iv tois ra>v 8<$8eKa opioiai 
pepav. 

3. Kovpd] E. g. the cutting 
of osiers and brushwood, the 
mowing of grass and reaping 
of straw, the cropping of 
horses' and camels' hair, the 
shearing of sheep. 

7. 8eo-pcbv] Such as glue 
and thread. 

IO. to npa>Toyev€S dvOpatnois 

KTTJpu] The first-born of hu- 
man possessions, because ne- 
cessary to the production of 
all else. The word is a rare 
one, and occurs in the Orphic 
verses, where also Nature 

((£ucm) is called npcDToyeveia. 

It seems probable that Plato 
had this, in common with 
other terms employed in these 
dialogues, from a Pythagorean 
source. 



nOAITIKOS. 



121 



i88 



NE. 2Q. KaXm. 

S'E. Trjv <5?) rrjs rpo(j)r)s KTrjaii 1 , kou oau ek to 
au>pa ^vyKarapLyvvpeva eavTwv pepeai peprj aoopa- 
T09 €L9 to OepaTrevaai. Tiva hvva\xiv e'/A^e, XtKTtov 
89. efiSofXOV ovopaaavTas avTO ^vp-rvav i]p<hv eivai Tpo- 1 
(pov, el yu?7 tl kolXXlov e^opev aXXo 6ea6at. yeoopyiKfj 
8e kolI OrjpevTLKr) kou yvpvao-TLKr\ koll laTpiKrj kou 
p.ay€LpLKTj irav viroTiOevTes bpOoTtpov anroScoaopLev 77 
Trj 7roXiTLKrj. 

NE. SO. ITwy yap ov ; 

SE. ^xeSoz/ To'ivvv oo~a €)(eTai KTrjaeco?, irXr)v 

TWV 7]pL€pC0l> £(OCQl>, lv T0VT0L9 llTTOL ol/JLGU yeVtCTLV 

elprjcrOai. aKowei 8e' rjv yap SiKaioTaTa pli> av TeOlv 

b /car' apxas to TrpcoToyeves elSo?, /xercc Se tovto op- 

yavov, ayyeiov, oxypa, 7rp6(3Xr)p,a, iraiyviov, Opeppa. 

irapaXeLTTopev Se el tl prj peya XeXrjOev eh tl tov- 



Sevi ntlil;. . 
nourish- 
ments. 



Into these 
seven kin ds 
all posses- 
sions ex- 
cept living 
creatures 
can, by 
hook or 
5 by crook, 
be distri- 
buted. 



3. eavTav fxepeai] The po- 
sition of eavT&v pepecriv, which 
is for the sake of emphasis, 
determines the order of the 
following words. The whole is 
a periphrasis for (pdppaKa. 

peprj aaparos eh to 6epa- 
7rev(rai hvvap.iv riva] Note the 

invei*sion : for 8w. r. eh to 6ep. 

0-copa.TOs peprj. 

7. yvp.va.aTiK.fi] Because the 
trainer prescribes a certain 
diet. 

II. ova e)(eTai /cr^o-ews] Cf. 
Thefet. 145 a : ova. re iraidelas 
e)(eTai, alib. 

13. rjv yap] " For we had, 
what would rightly have been 
placed first, the primitialkind." 

15. Gpeppa] "Nourishment." 
This meaning is not noticed in 
the Lexicons, but Stallbaum 



well compares the use of yev- 
vrjpa in Soph. 266 d. Both 
uses originate in the " cog- 
nate" object of the active 
becoming the subject of the 
passive voice. 6peppa retains 
a verbal signification also in 
Legg. 7, 789 b : Tpecpovaiv — 
dpviOcov 8pepp.aTa. 

1 6. irapake'iiTopev — 0-vp.cpaiv^aei] 

" But we pass over whatever 
insignificant kind may have 
escaped us, which may pos- 
sibly be made to fit into one 
of these, for instance, -the na- 
ture of coins, seals, and stamps 
of all sorts." [peya], which 
Bocll. Vat. Ven. n omit, is re- 
tained, not as genuine, but as 
possibly preserving the trace 
of a lost reading, perhaps of 
P-6yis, suggested by Stallbaum. 



1252 



HAATONOS 



Animate 



*ii mis, with 
the excep- 
tion of 
sl:m s,\\i re 
previously 

i 1 1- ' 1 1 1< 1 ■ < I in 
the art of 
tending 
herds. 
There 
remains 
therefore 
the class of 
servants, 
amongst 
whom to 
look for the 
nearest 
rivals of 
the king. 
But slaves, 
who are 
servants in 



Tcov *|* [//eya] "|" Svvoltov dppoTTeiv, olov i) rov vofii- p. 28 
(t/jlutos I8ea koll a([)payldoju koll ttolvtos x a P aKT VP ^- 
yivos Te yap Iv avrois ravra ovftev e^ei ptya qvv- 
vollov, aXXd tol piv els Koapov, tol 8e el? opyava 

5 j3ia p.ev, opco? <5e irdvTtos eXKO/ieva avpojcouyaei. 
tol Se 7T€pl tfiiodv ktyjctlv tcov r)p.lpcov, ttXt]V SovXcov, 
■>'] Trporepou uyeXaLorpo(j)LKr) Sia/jLepiaOe'io-a irdvTa c 
eiXrjcpvia avcKpaiverai. 

NE. 212. Yldvv p.lv ovv. 

o SE. To Se 8r) 8ovXow koll iravrcov inrypeTcdu Xonrov, 
Iv oh itov koll pavrevo/xaL rov? 7rep\ clvto to 7rXeyp.a 
dpcpcafirjTOvi'Tcxs tco fiacnXeL Karoxpaveis yevrjaeaOaL, 
KaOdirep toI$ vcpdvTOLLs tot€ tov? irep\ to vrjOew re 



3. yevos — o-vp(paiVT)0~ei\ u For 
these, while they have not in 
them the nature of any exten- 
sive kind which can be classed 
along with them, yet can, by 
hook or by crook, be made to 
harmonize, though not without 
some violence, either with the 
ornaments or the instruments 
of life." 

re yap — aAXct] be and 
even pevToi and dXka may 
sometimes follow re, when the 
opposition between two paral- 
lel clauses is thought of as 
the sentence proceeds, Cf. 

Phasdo 63 C : irapa avbpas re — 
on pevroi irapa deovs, where 
however pev is interposed, and 

Theeet. I43 C : irepl ahrov re rj 
av Trepl rbv diroKpivopevov. The 

two clauses here answer to py 

peya and hvvarbv dpporreiv SUpr. 

4. ds Kocrpov] Which is a de- 
partment of iraiyviov '. 288 C. 

5. /3t'a pev — opms 8e] Cf. 
Eep. IO, 607 e: (3la pev, opws 



Be dnexovTat, and Soph. Ant. 
1 1 16 : o'ipoi pohis pev, KapBlas 
B' eglaTapai to Bpav, re is used 
because their not being refer- 
rible to an important class is 
one of the two reasons for 
omitting them. 

7. rj nporepov dyeXaiorpoCpiKr) 

biapepiaGelaa ] Note the in- 
verted order. 

11. ev oh nov] " Somewhere 
amongst whom." 

rovs irepl avro to irXeypa] 
He refers to the difficulty 
about the king in the language 
of the example of weaving r 
i. e. those who dispute with the 
king about the fabric of the 
web itself and not only about 
the instruments of the manu- 
facture. Cf. 268, 281 ; and 
vid. infr. 305 e : iravra gwv- 

(paivovaav opdoraTa ttjv Br) 

(3ao~i\iKr)v avpirXoKrjV. 

1 3. toIs v(pdvrais\ Sc. dptfiio-- 
ftrjTovvTas (paiveo-Qai. 



nOAITIKOS. 



123 



289. Kai ijalveiv kcll oaa aXXa eiTrop.zv. 01 <$' aXXoi ndv- 
res, c6? dvvaiTLOi XeyOtvTes, d/xa reus- epyoi? to 19 vvv 
d 8y prjOeicriv dvrjXcovTai Kai aTreywpLcrOi^aav diro /3a- 
aiXiKrj? T€ kou TroXiTiKrjs 7rpd^eco9. 

NE. 20. 'EoLKacn yovv. 5 

SE. "Wl 8rj aKeyj/cofieOa tov? Xolttovs, irpoo-- 
eXOovTe? iyyvOev, tv clvtovs 1 dftcofiev fiefiatoTepov. 

NE. 20. Ovkovv xPV- 

S*E. Tov? fiev Srj fieyiaTOVs VTrrjptTas, coy IvOivBe 
iSeiv, TOvvavTLOV e)(0VTas evplaKO/jLev oh v7rco7TT€vaa- 10 
fxev eTTLTrjbevfxa kou ttglOos. 

NE. 20. Ttvas ; 

SE. Tow wvttjtovs T€ Kai rco Tpo7ra> tovtco ktt]- 
tovs' ov? avafjLCpio-firjTrjTcos SovXov? eypp.ev direlv, 
e r\KiCFTa fiao-iXLKrjs pLCTairoLovpLevovs Teyvrjs. 15 

NE. 20. ILSpc? otf; 

37E. T/ 6Y; 7W iXevOepcov octol toIs vvv brj prj- 



tli«- highest 

degree, 
have do- 
thing in 
common 
with the 
king. Nor 
have thoBe 
freemen 
who en- 
gage as 
hirelings 
in the ser- 
vile opera- 
tions of 
trade. 



9. fieyia-rovs — cos iv6kv8e tSeti/] 

" The greatest — as seen from 
where we now stand." I. e. 
the greatest servants, because 
most essentially such, this 
being the only measure which 
our method allows. Cf. infr. 
303 c, for the same use of 
(xeyio-Tos. Also Phileb. 45 a : 

peyuTTai. tcov t)8ov£>v. Legg. I, 
630 a : tov ? iv too fieyi(TTco 
7To\epa> yiyvopevovs aplcrToxjs 

8tc«pa.va>s. The contempt here 
implied for dianovia may be 
contrasted with a striking pas- 
sage of the Laws, where the 
power of ministering to them- 
selves and others is made es- 
sential to the officers of state, 

6, 762 e : KaWa>Tri£ecr6ai XPV 



too KaKcos 8ov\ev(rcu paXKov fj too 
koXcos apgai. lb. 763 a : avrol 
81 avriov 8iavorj8ijTcoarav cos j3tco- 
aopevoi 8caKovovvres re Kai 8ia- 
Kovovpevoi eavTols. 

10. ok] = eKeivois a. Plural, 
because of the two antecedents, 

eTrLTT]8evpct icai iraOos. 

1 1 . Ka\ TtaOos] " And feel- 
ing," viz. ambition. 

17. vols viiv 8f] prj6ei<riv ds 
vnrjpeTiKrjv] Qu. an legend. 
virqpea-iav 1 See, however, Eu- 
thyphr. 13 d. " To the task of 
ministering to those just now 
mentioned" (the artificers of 
the seven kinds of posses- 
sions). All trade, especially 
in money, is viewed by the 
Greek philosophers as essenti- 

R 2, 



124 



nAATQNOS 



0€l(TLU 6/9 VTT^piTLK^V (zKOVTtS OLVTOV9 TOLTTOVCTL, T« T€ ]>. 2* 

yeoopyla? koll tu twv akkcov Teyvwv epya SiaKu/JLitpv- 
T€$ eir ah\i)\ovs koll avi(rovi>T€?, ol p.ev kolt uyopa?, 
ol Se ttoKlv 4k iroXeois aXXaTTOVTes Kara OaXarrav 
5 koll Tre^rj, v6/ucrp.d re wpb? ruXXa koll olvto 7rpbs olvto 
SLapLelfiovTes, ow dpyvpap.oi(3ov9 re koll ep.7ropov9 koll p. 29 

VOLVKAl'lpOVS KOLL KOLTTqkoVS €7rOWOp.OLKOLp.ei>, p.U>V T7]9 

ttoXltlkyjs dp.(j)Laj3r]Tr)crovaL tl ; 

NE. 20. Tax' dv 'laws rr)s ye rcou epiropevTLKwv. 
[o 3?E. 'AAA' 01; pjjv, ovs ye opcopev p.Lcr0o)Tov? koll 
Orjras ttolo-lv eTOLpLOTOLTOL innqpeTOvvTOLS, prj TTore /3a- 
ctlAlktJs p.eTo.7TOLOvp.evovs evpoypiev. 



ally inferior to other forms of 
industry. Cf. Rep. 2,371b: 
Kai 8?) rail' ciXkav Siaxovuv 7rou 
Ta>i> re elo~a£6vra>v Kai i^n^ovrmv 
eKaara. ovtoi 8e elaiv 'dpnopoi. 
lb. C : elalp oi tovto opavres 
eavroiis iirl ttjv StaKOViai' rdr- 
Tovai TavTrjv, iv pew rats 6p6a>s 
otKovpevais noXecri a^ebov ti ol 
ao~6eveo~TaTOL to. aapara Kai 
uxpeloi Ti aXAo epyov irpdrTetv. — 
avTrj apa rj XP eia KanijXcov Tqplv 
yeve&iv e/x7roiet rfj noXet. rj ov 
KaiT7]Xovs KaXovpev tovs irpbs 
wvt]V re Kai irpao-iv diaKovovvras \ 

and for ttoXiv in TrdXeco? in tbis 
connexion, cf. Soph. 224 b, 
and note. 

The statesmen are viewed 
as duiKovoi in the Gorgias, 
p. 517. Cf. Theset. 175 e: 

Topa>$ re Kai b£ews oiaKoveiv. 

Legg. 8, 831 e (of the influ- 
ence of commerce) : ipnopovs re 

kuI vavKXrjpovs ko.1 diaKovovs irdv- 
T(os rovs (pvaei Koapiovs twv av- 
QpcoTTav tnrcpyafrpevr). 

I. to. re — diapeifiovres ] 

" Bringing over to each other 



and equalizing the work of the 
husbandman and of the other 
artificers (eV aXX^Xou?, sc. rovs 
yecopyovs, &c.) : some in the 
market-place and some trans- 
ferring them from city to city 
by sea and land, exchanging 
money for other commodities, 
and these for money." 

3. dvio-odvres] This seems 
to point to a doctrine of ex- 
change approaching to that of 
Aristotle in Eth. Nic. V. 

4. noXiv — dXXuTTOvTes] Cf. 
Soph. 224 b, and note. The 
words are usually taken to 
mean " going from city to 
city ; " for which cf. Theaet. 
181 d : x^P av eK x®P as M era " 
PdXXy. 

9. rrjs ye to>v epiropevriKcov 
(sc. iroXirtKTJs)] " The science 
of directing commercial inter- 
course." The merchant may 
profess political economy, but 
not statesmanship or political 
science. 

10. Kai drjTas] Cf. Euthyphr. 
4 c. 



I10AITIK02. 



125 



1290. NE. 20. Ylco9 yap ; 

aE. T7 <5e «jOa rotis* ra roiaSe SiaKovovvTas rjp.lv 
eKacTTore ; 

NE. 20. Ta 7rota eiVey /cat Ttvas ; 
b S*E. 'O//' to K^pvKLKOV eOvos, hcroi re irep\ ypap,- 
p.ara ao(j)di yiyvovTai ttoWvlkls vTryperyjaavTes; 
koll 7roAA' arra erepa irepl rots apyas SiaTroveiaOai 
tivzs erepoi 7rav8eivoi, t'l tovtovs av Aetjopcv ; 

NE. 20. c 'Oirep eiTres vvv, vTrrjpera?, aAA' ovk av- 
rov? iv tolls iroXecriv apypvTCLS. 

HE. 'AAA' ov pjjv, olpai ye, evimviov iScov ehrov 

TavTy Trrj (pavijcreaOai tovs 8ia(j)€p6vTa>? dp.<pLa(3t]- 

TOvvTos Trjs iroXuTLKrjs. Kal tol (T<p68pa ye cltottov av 

c elvai Soijeie to <j)reiv tovtovs iv virrjpeTiKr) poipa 

TLVL. 

NE. 20. KopuSfi ptv ovv. 

iH'E. "Ert Srj 7rpoapLt^copev iyyvTepov kiri tov? 
p.rpr(£> fiefiacravio-pevovs. elcri Se di re 7rep\ piavTiKrjv 
e^ovTes twos e7ricTTr)pr/? SiaKovov popiov epp.7]vevTal 
yap 7T0V vopifyvTai irapa 6ecov avdpumois. 



Then th< ra 

arc j .i 1 1 1 1 i ■ • 

HCrV.'UltH, 

-h.-li .1 ; 

bi paid 

a ad '-ribes, 

who arc 

not to be 
5 confound- 
ed with the 
rulers. Yet, 
however 
strange the 
thought 
that the 
claimants 
for the art 
of rule are 
10 to be found 
amongst 
servants, 
it was 
no mere 
dream. 
There are 
other pub- 
lic minis- 
ters -whom 
** we have 
not yet 
tried. 

The priest, 
who me- 
diates be- 
tween gods 
and men, 
and the 
20 prophet, 
who inter- 



2. rovs — SiciKavovvTas] Sc. ev- 
pcopev or Xe^opev. 

5. irep\ ypappara ] E. g. the 
public ypapparels at Athens. 

6. o-o(po\ — vivr]p(TrjO-avTei\ Of. 
Leg'g. 4, 720 b: e'dv re y eXev- 
8epoi aaiv edv re 8ovXoi, kut eiri- 
raf-iv be tbc beuTTOTUtv K.a\ decopiav 

Ka\<arep.T;eipiavTr)VTexy r l VKT "> VTai - 

7 . Kal 7roAA' arra — ndvbeivoij 

" And certain others most 
accomplished in performing 
many other processes con- 
nected with government." 

9. "Oirep elnes\ Supr. vnrjpe- 
Ti]<ravTas. 



II. 'AAA' ov — pulparivi] "Yet 
I am convinced it was no 
mere dream which prompted 
me to say that somewhere 
hereabouts would appear the 
men who above others put in 
an opposing claim to the poli- 
tical art — though it may in- 
deed be thought very absurd 
to look for these in any servile 
department." 

17. Trpocrpif-wpev eyyvrepov~\ 
Cf. Thea?t. 179c: irpocrireov ovv 
eyyvrepa. 

19. twos — popiov] " A por- 
tion of a kind of servile 



126 



0AAT0N02 



prets the 
v, ill of hea- 

Vl'll.llSSIIIIH' 

;ui impos- 
ing atti- 
tude. In 
Egypt the 
king must 
always be 
a priest, 
and the 
Arch on - 
Basileus at 
Athens 
performs 
the most 
ancient 
sacrifices. 
At last, 
then, we 
have hit 
upon a 
trace of 
those whom 
we seek. 
These 
archon- 
kings, 
elected by 
lot, belong 
with their 
ministers 
to a certain 
motley 
and shift- 
ing throng : 
some of 



NE. 20. Nat. p. 2 

AE. Kat p.r)v Kcii to tcov lepecov av yevos, coy to 
voptptov (prjcri, irapa p.ev rjp.cov dcopeds Oeols 8ia $v- 
aicov €7ricTTrj/i6v Ictti /cara vovv e'/ceiWy Scopetadai, 
5 7rapa Se tKelvcov rjplv ev^ctls ktyjctlv dyaOcov aiTTj- d 
aacrOaL. Tama 8e Smkovov Te^yr)^ ecrTL irov p.6pia 
aiKJyoTepa. 

NE. 20. <&alv€Tai yovv. 

A'E. ' H&7 to'lvvv pou 8oKovp.ev oiov ye tivos t)(vov? 
ioi(j) b TropevopLeda 7rpoaairTea6aL. to yap 8rj tcov 
lepecov o")(r}pLa /ecu to tcov fidvTecov ev p.aXa eppovr)- 
pcaTOS 7rXr}povTac /ecu Soijav aepLvrjv XapcfidveL Sid to 
p.eye6os tcov eyyeipr)p.aTcov, cocttc 7repl fiev KiyviTTOv 
ovK e^ecTTi fiacriXea xcoph iepaTiKrjs dp\eiv, aXX' edv e 
i^dpa /ecu Tvxfl irpoTepov itj aXXov yevovs (3iacrdp.evo?, 
vaTepov dvayKalov ely tovto elo-TeXelcrOai avTov to 
yevos. eri 8e kol tcov JD(Xr)vcov iroXXa^ov rcuy p,e- 
yicTTaLS apyais Ta p.eyiaTa tcov nepl Ta ToiavTa 
OvptaTa evpoi tls dv irpocTTaTTop.eva Oveiv. K.a\ 8rj 



art," viz. of that of the inter- 
preter, who is a species of 
servant. 

2 . if to vo/il/iov (fir/at] The 
irony of this appears from 
Legg. io, 906, Rep. 2, 364 e. 

4. Kara vovv i<eivois ] Cf. 
Soph. (Ed. Col. 1768 : Karh 
vovv Kflva, where the expres- 
sion conveys a similar reveren- 
tial feeling. 

9. oiov ye twos i'^vovs] Cf. 
Rep. 4, 432 d : Kiv8vvevop.ev ti 

€X elv iX v0S - 

10. to yap — yevos] " For we 
see that the priest and prophet 
assume an attitude of proud 



importance, and have im- 
pressed mankind with awe, on 
account of the greatness of 
their undertakings, so that in 
Egypt it is not lawful for a 
king to reign without the 
priesthood, but if it should so 
happen that he has previously 
forced his way to the throne 
from some other caste, it is 
necessary that he be after- 
wards initiated into this." 

18. to fieyio-ra 6vp.ara\ "The 

most important sacrifices con- 
nected with such things," viz. 
with propitiation. Qu. an le- 
gend. 6vp.arcov 1 



flOAITIKOS. 



127 



koll irap vfxlv ov% i]Ktara SrjXov o Xeyco' rw yap 
XayovTi (3aaiXet (paai TrjSe tol cTepvorara kou p.d- 
XiaTa Trarpia Tiov apyaiodv Ovctlcov dwodeducrOai. 

NE. 213. Kou irdvv ye. 

SE. Tovtovs re tolvvv tovs kXijpojtov? /3a<JiAeay 
afia kcu iepeas, kou v7rT)pera? avrcou Kai riva erepou 
irapiroXw byXov crKeirTeov, by dpn Kara8r]Xo? vvv 
rjfiiv yeyovev diroywpLaOevTOiV tcov epirpocrOev. 

NE. 212. Tlvas avrov? kou Xeyet? ; 

JSJE. Kou p.aXa Tivds oltottovs. 

NE. 212. T/ M) ; 

aE. TlapfyvXov tl yevos avrcov ws ye dpri o~ko- 
TTOvp-evcp (fxtiverai. iroXXoi peu ydp Xeovcri twv dv- 



whoin, like 
lions and 
Centaurs, 

are fierce 
and strung; 
others 
weak ;ind 
cunning, 

5 likeSatyrs. 
Yet their 
strange- 
ness is only 
the igno- 
rance of 
an unfami- 
liar vision. 
The mon- 
sters just 

10 described 
are no 
other than 
the band 
who man- 
age the 
affairs of 
states. 



2. rfjoV] " Here in Athens." 
Cf. the Rex Sacrificulus at 
Rome. He might have in- 
stanced Agamemnon in Ho- 
mer and Theseus in Greek 
tragedy. 

to. aejxvoTaTa kcu paXicrTa 

7rarpta] He presided at the 
Lenaean or older Dionysia : 
superintended the mysteries 
and games called \ap7ra8r)(po- 
piai, and had to offer up sacri- 
fices and prayers in the Eleu- 
siuium, both at Athens and 
Eleusis. (Smith's Diet, of Ant., 
s. v. Arch on.) 

5. KXrjpaiTovs] Following up 
the notion of Xaxovn. In men- 
tioning the (ipxav ftacnXevs we 
have at last hit upon one of 
the real pretenders to political 
power. 

6. Kai virrjpiras avrmv] Cf. 
Ar. Pol. IV. 1 2 : ebri 8e ovt)e 
rovro 8iopio~ai pa.8iov, irotas del 
KaKelp apxns' 7ToXXcoi> yap eVi- 
uTarwv tj noXiTiKi) Koivavia Bel- 



rat' dioirep iravTas ovre tovs 

alperovs ovre tovs KXrjpaTovs 

apxovras OeTtov, olov tovs iepeis 
TrpwTov. 

VTTrjpfTas avTav] The Xo- 

yoypacpoi are perhaps included, 
who furnished public speakers 
with arguments. 

9. Tivas — Kai] Cf. Thetet. 
160 e : o ti BrjTTOTe Kai rvy- 

Xavei ov. Euthyd. 27 1 a: '07ro- 

Tepov Kai iparas, a> Kpircav ', 

I 3. 7roXXoi — ffrjplois ] I. e. 

" Some strong and fierce, some 
weak and cunning." Compare 
Bacon, Adv. of Learning, Ellis' 
ed., p. 394. "And although 
we have said that the use of 
this doctrine (of Elenches) is 
for redargution, yet it is mani- 
fest the degenerate and cor- 
rupt use is for caption and 
contradiction : which passeth 
for a great faculty, and no 
doubt is of very great advant- 
age : though the difference be 
o-ood which was made between 



128 



IIAATONOS 



dpcoi^ zi^aai kol Y^evTavpois kui TOiovroiaiv (T€poi?, p 
7rap.7roXAoL 8e ^.arvpois koll tois dcrOevecri kol 7roXv- h 
Tpo7roi? Oif plots' rayv Se fieraXXuTTOvaL ra? re iSea? 
kcu ti)v Suva/iiv eh dXXrjXov?. kol fievroi fioi uvu, 
5 co 2co/c/j«re?, apri Sokco KaTavevorjKtvai tov? av- 
Spas. 

NE. 213. Aeyoi? av* eoiKa? yap arowov tl kolQ- 
opav. 

£E. Nat" to yap aroirov i£ ayvolas Tvacri avfi- 
to (3aivei. K.a\ yap Srj Ka\ vuv avrbs tovto cnraOop' 
itjatyvr)? rj/uL(fieyi>6r]o-a Kanbcov top 7rep\ ra tcoi> 7ro- 
Xecov irpaypLara yppov. 

NE. 20. lioiov ; e 

SiE. TW iravTcov ra>i> o~o^>io~twv fieyiarov yoryra 



orators and sophisters, that 
the one is as the greyhound, 
which hath the advantage in 
the race, and the other as the 
hare, which hath her advantage 
in the turn, so as it is the 
advantage to the weaker crea- 
ture." And cf. Legg. 6, 781 

a : to 8rj\v eTTU<\oira>Tepov 8id to 
daBeues. 

4. kcu jievToi av8pas] " And 

come, I do think I now this 
moment have perceived the na- 
ture of the men." 

7. eoiKcts — Kadopau] I. e. 
" Judging from your looks." 
Cf. Soph. Ant. 20 : S/7A01S ydp 
ti Ka\x a L V0V0 ~' enos. Legg. 7> 

8lO C : TL ffOTe T0VT G> £«Vf, 

(paivet Trpbs aavTov ovtcos T]7T0pr]- 
kcos \eyeiv ' } 

The principle of election by 
lot, which Plato ridicules here, 
is admitted within very narrow 
limits in the Laws. Cf. Legg. 

3, 690 d : Qeocpikr) 8e ye Kcil 



evcpikrj Tiva \eyovTes e/386pr]V cip- 

xw (compare the seven forms 
of government and seven ca- 
tegories of possession in the 
Politicus) els Kkrjpov Tiva irpo- 
dyopev k.t.\. 

9. to yap (itottov ££■ dyvoias] 

Cf. Arist. Met. I. 2. 982 b: 6 8' 

dwopcov kcu 6avp.d£a>v ot'erat dy- 
voe'iv. 

10. avros tovto enadov] " I 
myself fell into this snare," 
viz. of thinking sti-ange what 
was only strange to me. The 
Stranger is like the philoso- 
pher as described in the Theas- 
tetus, Avho knows nothing of 
public assemblies or the de- 
tails of civic life. For Trdo-x<o 
in this sense, cf. Soph. 232 a, 
Ar. Pol. IV. 7 • tovto ndcrxovo-iv 
01 \eyovTes 8ia to pepTixdai KaKa>s. 

11. e£al(pvr]s belongs by an 
hyperbaton to KaTi8a>v. 

14. Tov — yorjTa] Cf. Soph. 
235 a : els yorjTa p.ev 8i] kcu p.i- 



00AITIK02. 



129 



91. KOLl TOLVTT}? Tt]S Te^UTJ^ epireipOTOLTOV OV U7T0 T03V 

bvrm ovtcov ttoXltikwv kou fiaaiXiKCDv Ka'nvep iray- 
yaXeTrov ovra a^atpeiv d(f)aipeT€OV } el p.eXXopev \8e1v 
evapym to (jfTovpevov- 

NE. 20. 'AAAa prjv tovto ye ovk avereov. 

HE. Ovkovv 8rj Kara ye tijv e/.u/u. kul p.ot (f)pa£e 
To8e. 

NE. 20. To TToigv; 
d HE. 'Ap ov povapyja twv ttoXltlkwv -qplv ap^cov 
earl pla ; 

NE. 20. Nat. 

HE. Kou pera povapylav e'hroL tis av>, olpat, ttjv 
virb tcov oXiycov dvvaareiau. 

NE. 20. n«?<5' ov; 

HE. Tplrov Se a)(rjpa 7roXiTeias ov\ rj rod nXr/- 
6ovs apyr), SrjpoKpaTia rovvopa KXrjOelaa ; 

NE. 20. lidvv ye. 

HE. Tpel? 5' ovaai p.a>v ov irevre rpoirov tlvol 
yiyvovTOLi, 8vo e£ eavrcov aXXa 7T/oo? avrcus bvbpara 
tiktovo-cli ; 



impostor of 
impostors, 
who must 
be ■ pa- 
rato a, how- 
ever diffi- 
cult the 
task, from 

i tlie true 
Statesman 
and King. 
We com- 
monly 
speak of 
three forms 
of govern- 
ment, mon- 
archy, oli- 

[ °garchy,and 
democracy. 
And the 
distinctions 
of compul- 
sion and 
freedom, 
poverty 
and wealth, 

[£ . observance 
of the laws 
and law- 



give rise to 
the further 
division 
of mon- 
archy into 
royalty and 
20 tyranny, 



fiTjTrjv apa dereov riva. The sin- 
gular after x°P ov is curious, but 
this is only one more instance 
of the transition from the class 
to the ideal individual, which 
we have had frequent occasion 
to notice. 

I. TavTrjs ttjs re)(yr)s epneipo- 
rarov] Sc. ttjs aocpiariKris. Cf. 
Gorg. 465 d : (pvpovrai iv rw 
avrcp kuI irep\ ravra aocpajrai Ka\ 
prjTopes, kol ovk e^ovcriv on XP1~ 
o~a>vT<u ovre avrol eavrols ovre 01 
a'AXoi (ivdpunroi tovtols. 

5. 'AXXa firjv] " Well, we 
must not relax our efforts in 



regard to this." 

tovto] Sc. to ivapyas I8e1v 

TO £r]T0Vp.€V0V. 

6. KaTa ye ttjv eprjv] Cf. SUpr. 

277 a. 

13. vnb t5>v oXiyoov] Depend- 
ing on the verbal notion in 
SwacrTeiav. Cf. Rep. 2, 359 a : 

to biro tov vopov iniTaypa. 

19. 8vo — TiKTovcrai] So the 
three categories of the Sophist, 
Being, Eest, and Motion, be- 
came five through generating, 
" by their own dialectic," the 
categories of Sameness and 
Difference. 



130 



riAATONOS 



and of oli- 
garchy Into 
aristocracy 
and pluto- 
cracy. 
The Bame 
distine- 
tions do 
doubt arise 
in demo- 
cracy, I'Ut 
without 
changing 
the name. 
Thus the 
common 
way of 
thinking 
recogiiizes 
five forms. 
But is any 
one of these 
based on a 
real prin- 
ciple ? 
For we 
have as- 
sumed from 
the first 
that there 
is a science 
of govern- 
ment. 



NE. 20. Uola Srj ; p. 

SE. 11/90? TO filaiOV 7T0V K(JU eKOVGLOV aTTOCTKO- G 
TTOVVTtS VVV, Kol TieviaV KCli TrXoVTOV, KOL VOfJLOV KOLL 

avofxlav, Iv aureus yiyvofxeva, 8nrXr)v eKarepav rolv 
sSvolv diaipovvres p.ovapyiav fiev wpoaayopevovaiv a>? 
Svo irapeyo\ievr\v eldi] 8vo?v bvopacn, TvpavviBt, to 8e 
/3ao-i\iKj}. 

NE. 20. 17 wit ; 

S*E. Tr)v 8e virb oXlycov ye eKaaTOTe KparrjOelaav 
iottoXlv dpicrTOKpaTia. kou oXiyapyla. 

NE. 212. Kat irdvv ye. 

HE. Arj/xoKpaTias ye jxrjv, lav r ovv ftiaico? lav 
T6 eKovo-lco? tcov To.? ovcria? e\bvT(£>v to TrXrjQos p. 
apxf), Koi lav re tovs vo/jlov? aKpiftcos (f)vXa.TTOv 
1 5 lav re fir}, iravTcas Tovvo/xa ovdels avTrj? etcoOe 
fieTaXXdrTeiv . 

NE. 20. 'AAt?^. 

HE. T/ ovv ; oiopLeOd Tiva tovtcov tcov TroXiTeicov 



^ ■ 



29 



3. vvv\ " According to pre- 
sent notions." Cf. Soph. 236 a. 

In Rep. 8, 9, we have the 
picture of four imperfect states, 
Timocracy, Oligarchy, Demo- 
cracy, and Tyranny, nearly cor- 
responding to the four "which 
are distinguished from Kingly 
Monarchy here. But the esti- 
mate of each, and the mode in 
which their relation to the 
ideal government is conceived, 
are very different in the two 
passages. Plato is avowedly 
speaking here according tp 
the common opinion. The 
acknowledgment that, after all, 
democracy, under legal con- 
ditions, is the least bad, is a 



point of approximation to the 
Laws. See the Introduction to 
the Statesman. 

tve.vi.av Ka\ -rikovTov\ Wealth 
being the mark of the tyrant 
and oligarch, as distinguished 
from the king and the aristo- 
crat, as well as from the 
people. 

6. Tvpavvidi, to 3e (Sacri\iKfj~\ 
Cf. Soph. 221 e : v(v(ttikov fie- 
povs, to Se Tre^ov TepvovTes (where 
see note). Phsedo 105 e : 

' Apovaov, e<firj, to 8e adiKOv. to, 
SC. e?8os. 

IO. dp. Kal oXiy.] Sc. hiaipouatv. 

15. avTrjs] Resuming drjpo- 
Kparias, which is placed at the 
beginning for emphasis. 



nOAITIKOS. 



131 



1*92. 6p6r)V dvai tovtoi? tois opoi? bpiaQeiaav, ivi kou 

6\[yOl9 KOU 7To\\oiS) KOU irXoVTCO KOU TTtVia, KOU TCp 

(3iaia) kou €KOV(ri(p, kou /x€Ta ypapparcov kou avev 
vofJLGiv ^v/jL/3ali/ovaai> yiyveaOcu ; 

• NE. 20. T7 yap 87) kou KcoXuei ; 5 

b aE. ^k6tt€l 87) (jatyearepov, rfjde €7r6p.evos. 

NE. 20. By ; 

aE. T« prjdevTL Kara 7rpcoTas irorepov e/ifxevovpiei' 
?; dLa(poji>7]0'OfJLeu ; 

NE. 20. Ta> 87) Tro'icp Xeyus ; 10 

£7E. Trjv fioi(TL\LKr)v ap)(r)V tcdis liTLcnri\xoiv dva'i 
nva etyapev, oipou. 

NE. 20. No/. 

SE. Kat tovtcov ye ol>x airaawv, dXXoc KpiriKrjv 
8r)7rov tlvol kou €7riaraTLKrjP e/c tw akXoov 7rpoeiX6- 15 



2. Tffl ftiaia Kal eKOvaico] Cf. 
Arist. Pol. III. I : at eVi'as rS>v 
7rd\iT€iS>v tco Kpareiv ovcras, aX\ 
ov 81a to Ko'ivrj vvpcpepeiv. 

3. Kai — ylyveadatj Plato re- 
verts to the main construction 
(here participial) instead of add- 
ing another dependent clause. 

The Words perci — ypappdroov — 

ylyveo-Bai stand in apposition to 
tovtois — 6pio~de7o~av. 

pera ypappdrcov Kal avev vo- 
pav\ Note the variety of ex- 
pression. The laws are spoken 
of with some contempt as 
mere ypdppara, and are thus 
compared to written rules of 
art. Compare Phsedr. 258 a, 
Gorg. 451 b : ol iv to> 8rjpm 
avyypacpopevot. Legg. 9, 858 C : 
ypdppara pev ttov ko.1 iv ypdupacri 
\6yoi Kal aWcov dcrl noXXcov iv 



rals TroXecrt yeypappevoi, ypdppara 
de Kal to. tov vopadirov Kal Xdyot. 
lb. 957 c. The expression is 
often used also by Aristotle in 
the Politics. 

8. Kara nparas] A parallel 
idiom to Kara povas. Kara as in 
Kar dpxds. Some such word as 
vnoOeo-iis may be here supplied. 

II. to>v im.o~Trjpa>v eivai Tiva~\ 
Supr. 258 b. 

I4. KpiTlKTjV Tiva Kal iirio-TaTi- 

ktjv] " One which is at once 
critical and commanding." This 
appears from 260 a, where, 
however, KpiriKf], or rather yvw- 
ariKrj, and ciutcuo-iky], are the 
terms opposed. Compare supr. 
275 c, Soph. 223 b, 224 d, 
where there is a similar verbal 
inexactness of reference. 



S 2 



i m 



nAATONOS 



But scien- 
tific go- 
vernment 
is not se- 
cured by 
the rulers 
being 
many, few 
or one, 
rich or 
poor, or by 
their rule 
being com- 
pulsory or 
voluntary. 
We have 
still, then, 
to discover 
under 
which of 
these forms 
there is 
contained 



NE. 20. Nai. p. 

SE. K(XK Tl]$ €7riCTTaTtKrj? T^f /J.€U eV d\j/vxoLS 

epyois, Ti]v 8e iirl £wois". kcu Kara tovtov 5tt tov c 
Tpoirov /lepl^ovre? 8evp del 7rpoeXi]Xv0a/iev, eirLaTrj- 
5 /X77? ovk liTL\av6av6p.evoL, to $ rjri? ovx ikolvcos irco 
8vvdpevoc SiaKpL^coaaaOaL. 

NE. 20. Aeyeis 6 P 0m. 

SE. Tout olvto tolvvv dp evvoovpev, oti tov opov 

ovk oXiyovs oi>8e 7roXXovs, ov8e to eKovcnov ov8e to 

10 aKOvaiou, ov8e ireviav ov8e ttXovtov ylyvecrOai irepl 

amcov \pecov, dXXd Tiva e7Tio-Tr]prjv ; eiirep aKoXov- 

dr]aop.ev toIs irpoadev ; 

NE. 20. 'AAAce fJLTjv tovto ye d8vvctTOV /lit) d 
iroLelv. 
l 5 S?E. 'E£ dvdyKr)? 8rj vvv tovto ovtco aKeiTTeov, 
iv tlvl 7TOT6 tovtcov eir LCFTr) /XT? £vp(3alveL yiyvecrdai 
ire pi dvOptoirtov dpyrjs, crye8ov ttJ? x a ^ e7r&rrc "" 7 7 y KaL 
fieyiCTT-qs KTrjaaaOai. 8et yap tdeiv avTr/v, tva 6ea- 
crcop.e6a twos dcpaipeTeov diro tov (ppovl/xov fiacri- 



2. ttjp pev ttjv Be] irpoetko- 

fieda cannot be repeated here, 
but some notion contained in 
this verb, such as iOepeda, must 
be supplied. 

5. to <f t\tls\ Cf. Aesch. 
Prom. 765 : ti d' ovtiv ; 

8. rov opov'] " The distin- 
guishing principle of the state." 
Cf. supr. tovtols rots Spots. Rep. 
8, 551 C : opos avrrjs (rjjy oAt- 
yapxuts) olos eo~Tiv . Legg. 1,626 
b : ov yap opov edov rrjs ev no\i- 
revopevrjs woXeas. 

II. avTav] Neut. 

13. tovto ye] Sc. a.KOv\ov6e"iv 
rots irpouQev. 



16. ev tivi nore tovtcov] For 
the irony of this, compare the 
Search for Justice in the State, 
Rep. 2, 368 e : "Io-<bs toLwv 

like Lav av BiKaioo-vvr] iv tco peL£ovi 
eveirj kcu paav narapadelv. lb. 

373 e. ? 

17. av6. apxqs, ttjs ^aXe7rwrd- 
ttjs — KTTjo-aadai] There is a 
strong emphasis on avBpatrav. 
Cf. Theset. 174 d : Bvo-KoXaTepov 

Be eneLvav £aov Kai eirifiovkoTepov 
noipaLveiv Te Kai j3BaX\eiv vo- 

pL£ei avrovs. See also Xen. 
Cyrop. I. 1. 

18. avTrjv] Sc. ttjv nep\ av. 
apx- e7Tio-Tt]p7]v. 



nOAITIKOS. 



m 



92. AeW, o'l irpocnToiovvTai fxlv eivai 7toXitlkoI kul irei- 
Oovctl iroXXov?, ela\ 8e ovda/jLco?. 

NE. 212. Ae* yap 8rj iroiew tovto, a>s 6 Aoyoy 
c rjfxii; TrpoeiprjKev. 

HE. Mwf ow 5o/c€i TrXijOos ye ev iroXei ravTr/v < 
t^ €7rio-Tr)fJLi]v bvvoTov eivai KT-qaaaOai ; 

NE. 20. KcuTrcSy; 

HE. 'AAA a^oa eV ^iXiavSpcp iroXei bvvarov e'/coc- 
roz^ r^a? 7) /ecu TrevTrjKovTa avrr)v Ikclvws ktyj- 
aacrdai ; 

NE. 212. 'Paarr) pAvr av ovrco y elrj Traawv tcov 
Teyycav' tdfiev yap otl ^lXlcov dvdpcov aKpot ireTTev- 
ra\ roaovTOi irpbs rovs ev tols aXXois "YtXXrjaiv ovk 
av yevoivro 7rore, pur) ri Sr) (3a(riXei? ye. Set yap Si) 
tov ye rr)v fiacriXLKi]v eypvra eTTLarrjfxrjv, av r oipyrj 
.93. K.a\ eav pirj, Kara, tov eparpoaOe Xoyov ofioos (3aai- 
Xlkov TrpoaayopeveaQai. 

HE. KaAeos" aTTepivrjfxouevcrag. eiro/xevov 8e olficu 
tovtco rrjv fiev opOrjv dp\rjv irep\ eva tlvol Kal 8vo 



il, harde 1 
of .-ill ac 
qui ition 
the art of 
governing 
men, be- 
fore we can 
clear awaj 
the rival 
impostors 
from the 
true king. 
The mul- 
titude 
cannot 
have this 
science. 
( Nor can 
fifty in a 
thousand 
be found 
possessed 
of it. 



The true 
rulers, 
then, if 
more than 



5. 7r\r)66s ye] " The people 
at least." I. e. " Whoever else 
has wisdom, do you think the 
masses have it V Cf. Rep. 6, 

494 a : (piXoaotpov pev lipa — 
n^r/dos ahvvarov eivai. 

13. too-ovtol] Sc. enaTov r) -nev- 
TrjKovra. 

irpos — •"EAAqo-ti'] " First-rate 
as compared with those in 
the rest of Greece." Even 
these few are still judged, 
therefore, by a relative stand- 
ard. 

14. pi] ti §77 — ye] Cf. Dem. 
01. 2, § 23 : ovk evi 8' avrov 
dpyovvra ovbe toIs (pi\ois irnraT- 
reiv virep avrov ti iroielv, prjn ye 



8r) toIs 6eo7s (PaSSOW, S. V. [Mr]). 

Compare Rep. 2, 374 c : 7) ovroa 

pqbiov ware a|ta. And for the 

general tenour of this passage, 
Rep. 4, 428, Cratyl. 389 a : 

6 vopo&errjs, off 8r) tcov Srjpiovp- 
ya>v cnravicoTaTOs ev avBpcoTTOLs 
yiyverai. 

1 6. Kara tov eprrpocrde \6yov] 

Viz. 259 a. 

18. eiropevov — tovtco] These 

words are in apposition. 

19. ttjv pev opdrjV cipxrjv] The 

context shews that dpxn is used 
here generally of all authority. 
Cf. Rep. 1, 342 e : old' SWos 

ovdus iv ovdepiq clpxij- 

nepl eva tivci Ka\ Svo] Cf. 



134 



FIAATQN02 



one, must 

verj few. 

And u In - 
thcr they 
be rich or 
I r, w ne- 
ther their 
subjects be 
willing or 
unwilling, 
whether 
they go- 
vern with 
or without 
law, we 
must es- 
teem them 
as such, so 
long as 
they rule 
according 
to the prin- 
ciples of 
their art, 



koll iravTaixacriv oXiyovs del (j]T€W, orav opOrj yi- p. 2< 
yvrjTai. 

NE. 20. T/ ix-qv ; 

3*E. Tovtov? Se ye, lav re Ikovtcov lav re clkov- 
5 tcov apyoxriv, lav re Kara ypappcara lav re avev 
ypappdrcov, kol lav 7tXovtovvt€? t) 7T€vop.evoi, vopu- 
cttIov, (ocnrep vvv r)yovp.e0a, Kara rlyvrjv tjvtlvovv 
dpXVv apyovras. tovs larpovs 5e ovy^ x]Kiaja vevopl- b 
Ka/utev, lav re eKOvra? lav re atcovras rj/idg icovTai, 
to Tepvovres rj Kaiovrts rj nva dXXrjv dXyrjdova 7rpocr- 
dirrovTeSi koll lav Kara ypappoja r) yapis ypo.pp.d- 
tcov, Kai lav 7revrjT€S k ovres r) ttXovctloi, iravTcas ovdev 
tJttov larpovs (j)ap.ev, eaxrirep dv iTricrTarovvTes re^vr), 



Phileb. 66 b : ire pi perpov Kai to 
perpcov kol OTVoaa \P1 Toiavra 
vopi^eiv rrjv atdiov rjpr]0-6ai (pvaLV. 

6. TrXovTovvres f/ irevopevoi] 
Cf. I Ale. 107 C : av re Treves dv 
re irXovcrios rj 6 irapaivuiv ovhev 
bioicreC ABrjvaiOLS orav — fiovkevwv- 
rai irons dv vyiaivoiev, dWa forov- 
o~iv larpbv eivai rbv avpftovXov. 

vop-icrreov — cipxovras] dp^ovras 

is to be taken twice in con- 
struing. " They must be es- 
teemed as rulers, whatever rule 
it be which they conduct ac- 
cording to art." 

8. vevopUapev] The verb is 
resumed in <pdpev below. Cf. 
Soph. 230 C, d : vopi^ovres yap 
3> iral — irXeico 8e p.rj, and note. 
larpovs is to be repeated in 
thought after vevopUapev : or the 
verb is perhaps used absolutely, 
as in vopl^eiv 6eovs. Cf. Rep. 5, 
476 c, Gorg. 466 b. '■ And 
physicians more especially we 
allow to rank as such, whether 
they heal us with or against 



our will, by incision or cautery, 
or by the application of any 
other pain," (these words re'pvov- 
res — irpoo-dirrovres are explana- 
tory of aKovras,) "with or with- 
out written precepts, in po- 
verty or wealth, — in every case 
we call them equally physi- 
cians, so long as those who 
minister preside according to 
art over that to which they 
minister, and preserve the same 
by purging and reducing, or 
by adding flesh, if only they 
do this for the good of the 
bodies which they make better 
from being worse." (Perhaps 
however the sentence was at 
first intended to run vevopUa- 
pev — cpdvai = " We are accus- 
tomed — to speak," &c.) The 
meaning is further perplexed 
by the redundancy of dv povov in 
the same construction as «oo-- 
irep dv with aafao-iv. Compare 
Kep. 7, 529 b : e'ym yap av — 
pavddvrj. 



nOAITIKOS. 



1 35 



93. KaOalpovres e'/re d'XXto? \<jyyaivovTts ei're /cat av£jd- 
vovres, dv fxovov eV dyaOco rep tcov acofidrcov, fieXTico 
c TTOiOvvres e'/c yeipovcov, acotcocriv ol OepcnvevovTes e/ca- 
croi ra Oepairevopeva. ravrrj Oijao/nev, cos olpai, kou 
ovk aAAry, rovrov opov opOov elvai fiovov larpLKrj? koll 
aXXijs rjcmvocrovv dp^rjs. 

NE. 20. Ko/JLldfj fJL6V OUV. 

JE?E. ' ' AvayKahv Sr) koll TroXireicov, cos eWe, rav- 
tt]v 6pOr)v Siacpepovrcos eivai koll /xovtjv iroXirelav, eV 
fj ns av evplcTKOi rovs apypvras dXrjOcos eirLarrjpovas 

KOLL 01) doKOVVTCLS flOVOV, lav T€ KOLTOL VO/JLOVS lew T€ 

oivev vo/jlcov apxcocri, kou eKovrcov kcu aKOvrcov, r) ire- 
d vofxevoi 77 7rXovrovvres' rovrcov viroXoyicrriov ovSev 
ovSaficos eivai Kar ovde/iLav opOorrjra. 
NE. 20. KaAwc-. 

SE. Kal lav re ye diroKrivvvvres rivas ?; koll 

€K(3d/\AovT€? KaOaiptocTLV eV dyaOco rr)v woXlv, etre 

Kal diroiKLas oiov crfirjmj [ieXlttcov iKirefxirovTes ttol 



whatever 
that art 

may be. 
Thai i< the 
only true 

Col] I I 

trernment, 
which lias 
5 scientific 

i-iil.r . 
Ami as the 

physician 

is no less 
esteemed, 
whether he 
heal us 
will I or 
without our 

10 will and by 
whatever 
means ; so 
the ruler 
is no less 
a ruler, 
though his 
subjects be 
unwilling, 

j- if he suc- 
ceed in 
preserving 
them and 
making 
thembetter 
men ; whe- 
ther he 



4. ravrrj ak\rf\ " This, and 

no other, will be our decision, 
that" — . 

5. TOVTOV OpOV ] SC. TO 

T *X"I1 Kat e>7r ' dyaOco ap\eiv 

tS>v dpxofj-evcov. The doctrine 
of this passage coincides with 
Legg. 4 ; cf. esp. 712 e : as 5° 
covofxaKapev vvv, ovk elcrl 7roAireZa<, 
noXecov fie olKTjcreis hzo-iro(,op£vcov 
Te kcu 8ov\evovo~cov ptpecriv eavTcov 
tco-lv. lb. 713b: apxn re kcu 
o'ikt]0~is — en\ Kpovov pa\' evdal- 
pcov, tjs plprjpa e'xovad io~Tiv tJtis 
tcov vvv apio-ra oi/ceirai. lb. 7*5 

b. Compare the rejection of the 
false pleasures in Phileb. 51 a, 
tovtov — apx^ s ] This clause 
is an explanatory resumption 

of TCll/Ty. 



9. Kal poviiv 7roAfreiaz>] "And 
alone deserving of the name." 

11. doKOvvras] I. e. eTncrTrj- 
povas SoKovvras, like SeivorrjTes 
8oKovo-aL in Theset. 176 d. 

1 2. ko). — kcu] "Whether — or." 
Note the variety of expres- 
sion. 

13. vno\oyio-T€ov~\ Cf. Rep. 
I j 341 d : ovdev, olpai, tovto 
v7ro\oyio~Teov, on Tr\ei iv ttj vrp, 
oiK earl k\tjtcos vuvttjs' ov yap 
Kara to irXeiv KV^fpvrjTrjs Ka\elrai 
dXAa Kara, ttjv Te^vrjv Kal ttjv tcov 
vavTcov dpxr)v. 

16. dnoKTivvvvTes — e'/c/3aXXoi/- 
Tis] Cf. Gorg. 468. 

17. Kadalptoaiv] Cf. Legg. 5, 

735, Rep. 7, 540 e. 



rae t 
banish- 
ment, 01 
emigrati 
or U 



[36 riAATONOS 

have re- apiKpoTepau 7T0lu)(Tlv, rj Tivas eTreicrayopevoi TroOev p. 

aWovs eijooOev, ttoXitols TroiovvTes, amyv av^oicnv, 
ecocnrep av eino-Tiiprj koll tco Sikollco Trpocr^pcopevot, 

portation <Jco(j)VT€$, €K yelpovos fieATico 7roi<joai Kara 8uvap.iv, 

of fresh / / \ \ \ / '/ ' ~ 

Citizens. bTOLVTrjV TOT6 KCU KOTa TOVS TOLOVTOV9 OpOV$ rjpiV C 

Socrates is pOVIJV 6p6l]V TTO\lT€LO.V elvai pT)TeOV. OCTOS 8e ciWaS 

scandalized •» / > / > w v v \ r » \ % > 

by the pro- AeyopeV, OV yvyCTLa? OVO OVTCO? OVO~aS A€KT€Ol>, fJLAAa 
position / / ,\ \ « j / x / 

that there pLtpiprjpeva? TCLVTrjV, a?. peV 039 eVVOpOVS Aeyoptev, 

"^ g . eVt toc KaAAlco, tols 8e aAAay eiri ra altryiova pie- 

3KS" »(wfa 

law. He is 
answered, 
that al- 
though le- 
gislation 
is certainly 
a function 
of the king, 
yet the best 
conceiv- 
able go- 
vernment 
would be 
the supre- 

n f?y> not ^ avev vopcov dpxpvTcov dpOorrjTO? SieAOeip r)pas. 



NE. 212. Ta pev aAAa, w iijeve, peTplco? eoiKev 
elprjcrOai' to 8e kou avev vopcov 8eiv apyeiv yaAe- 
7T(DTepoi> ciKOveiv ipprjOrj. 

HE. 'Ep.iKpov ye e'(p07]s pe epoptevo?, d> ^EcaKpare?. 
i^epeAAov yap ere SiepcoTrjcreiv ravra irorepov airo8eyei P- 29 
wavTa, rf tl /cat ^ucr^epaiVei? to>v AeyOevToov' vvv he 
rjSy (pavepbv otl tovto fiovArjaopeOa to irep\ ttj? tcov 



1 . a-fiiKporepav Troiaxnv] This body politic, which is largely 

answers to la-^vaivovTes above. applied in the Republic. The 

3. eTvuTT^LTj Ka\ ro> 8iKaia>] notion of " the physician in- 

Which in regard to politics creasing the body" is obviously 

are the same. Cf. Theret. 150 suggested by the parallel of the 

a : aXXct dia ttjv ciSikov re <a\ state. 

anyyov ^vvayayrjv K.r.A. 12. to 8e — eppr]drj\ The formal 

7. Xe'yo/nei/] Sc. iroXireias. courtesy of these words, like 

9. eVi ra alo-xiova ] Cf. much else in this dialogue, ap- 

Phileb. 40 c : r)8ovaL pep-iprj- proaches the style of the Laws. 

pevai ras aKrjdels eVi ra yeXoi- 17 .j3ov\rj(T6pe8a — 8ie \6a.v rjpas] 

oTepa. The first person being used for 

peptprjo-dai ] There is a the second (cf. Theset. sub fin., 

return from the participial to Kvovp.*v. Supr. 283 e : ap' av 

the direct construction. In fiovkoip.e6a), the subject of /3ou- 

the above sentences there is \r)o-6p.eda is not the same as 

assumed the same analogy be- that of 8iik6eiv, hence the accus. 

tween the individual and the rjpas. 

state, the body natural and the rj)s — opdoTrjros] " The right- 



nOAITIKOI. 



137 



94> 



NE. 20. Ylm yap ov ; 

HE. Tf)07T01/ TLVOL fltVTOL ftr)\0V OTl TY)S (3a(TLAlKr)? 

icrrii/ i) vofxoOtTiKiy to S' apiarov ov tovs vopovs 
eariv io~)(V€ii>, aAA' avhpa rov pera (Ppoviyreois (3aai- 
Xlkov. olaff onr} ; 5 

NE. 212. Uf) 8y) Xlyeis ; 

HE. 'On VOp.09 OVK OLU 7T0T€ hvVOLLTO TO T€ apiCTTOV 
b KOLL TO SlKOLlOTOLTOV CLKplfitOS TTaCftV OLpGL TT6pihaficOV TO 

fieXTLCTTOV iiriTaTTtiV ai yap avopoLOTiqTes twv re 



l.iii oi B 

will. The 
reason La 

fchat :i fi.\';<l 

law can 

never be 
exactly 
applicable 
to the infi- 
nite vrarit tj 
and com 
plexity of 
human 
affairs. 



ness of rulers without laws." 
I. e. How it can ever be right 
to govern without laws'? 

2. /xeVrot] "Certainly." Giv- 
ing- assent to something which 
qualifies the foregoing asser- 
tion ; as in Soph. 245 b : aktj- 
OevTara fievroi Xeyeis. Symp. 
176 b : tovto pevTOi ev Xeyeis. 

4. dXX' avbpa j3a(Ti\iKov] 

" But the man who, having 
wisdom, is capable of sovereign 
rule." 

5. 07177] Sc. cipio-Tov eariv. 

7. "On] " Because." 
"On popos ovk dp civvairo] Cf. 
Arist. Pol. III. 10: 'Apx') 8" 

eo~ri rrjs £r)T7]o~ea)s civtt], ivorepop 
crvprpepei pdXXop vno tov apiarov 
dvdpbs fiaariXevecrdai 7 V7t6 rap 
dpicTTcop popoov. AoKei 8rj toLs 
popi(ov(Tt crvpcpepeip &ao-i\evecr6ai 
to KaOoXov povov 6 popos Xeyeip, 
aXX 01/ npbs ra TrpoaTviTTTopTa 
eTriraTTfip' cocrr e'p onoiqovv Tej(pr) 
to Kara ypdppara dpxeiv rjXldiop. 
Kai ep AlyinTTCp pera tj]p TeTpTj- 
pepov KLPelp e£jeo~Ti to'ls larpols' 
edp 8e tt pore pop, ejrl rc5 avTov 
Kipdvpco. 'AXXd pi)p KaKelpop Set 
vnapxet-p top Xoyop top KadoXnv 

To'ls (ipXOV(TC KpflTTOP 8' (O prf 

nporreaTi to nadrjTiKOP oXcos, »? co 
avpcpve's. Tco pep ovp popco tovto 



ov\ vnapxei, yf/vxrjP 5' dv6pooTTivrjp 
avdyKt] tovt e'xetp nuaav. 'AAX' 
icrcos up (pair) Tts <a? cipt\ tovtov 
povXevcrerai nep\ tcop ko.6' eKaoTa 

koXXiop. Aristotle concludes 
that there must be a lawgiver 
and laws : which, however, 
must not be absolute where 
they do not rightly apply. And 
there must obviously be an au- 
thority to determine cases not 
provided for by the laws. 
Should this authority be many, 
few, or one 1 The many are 
more difficult to corrupt — as 
much water is less easily fouled 
than little — but are less likely 
to care for the preservation of 
existing laws. One is better 
than a few, because the few 
are liable to division. See 
Plat. Legg. 9, 875. 

7. to re apiarop — iiriraTTetv] 

The dative -nucnp depends 
equally on TrepCXa$i»p and hrt- 
TUTTeip. Having comprehended 
exactly what is noblest and 
most righteous for all, at once 
to appoint what is best for all. 

9. at yap dvopoioTrjTes rjvri- 
povu] " For the dissimilarities 
both of men and actions, and 
what may be termed the abso- 
lute unrest of human things, 



1 88 



flAATQNOS 



Law is like 
a stupid 
and wilful 
man, who 
insists at 
all hazards, 
in spite of 
circum- 
stances, on 
obedience 
to his com- 
mands. 



Whence 
arises,then, 
the neces- 
sity of ma- 
king laws ? 
This is 
shewn by 
an ex- 
ample. 



avOpOHTGlV KOLL TCOU TTpa^OJV KOLL TO /JLT]8€7TOT€ /ni8ev, 

ths eiros eiireiv, i)avyjav dyeii* tG>v dvOpomivaiV ov8ev 
ewaiv airXovv eV ovdein nepl cnrdi'Tcou roll ewl iravra 
tov yjpovov airo^aiueaOaL Teyyrjv ov$ tjvtivovv. ravra 
5 8r) crvy)(OL>pov/jL€v ttov ; 

NE. SO. TV wv ; 

SE. Tov 8e ye vop.ov bptofiev o~ye8hv eir avTO 
tovto ^vvTelvovTa, wcnrep tlvol avOpaarov av0d8r] /cat 
d/uLa0r) Kca paqhiva pcr]8ev eu>vTa iroLtiv napa tt)v 
io iavrov rd^ii>, parjo^ eirepcoTav fxr]8ei>a, 117)8' dv tl veov 
dpa tco ijvpLfiaivri fieXnov irapd tov Xoyov ov avros 
eireTa^ev. 

NE. 20. 'AXr)6rj' 7tol€l yap areyycos, KaOdirep 
elprjKas vvv, 6 vop.09 tj/jllv eKaaTOLs. 

J 5 SE. OvKOVV d8vVCLT0V €V €)(eiP TTpOS TO. flT]8€7rOT€ 

dirXd to 8ia ttolvtos yiyvofxevov airXovv ; 
NE. 20. KivSvvevei. 
HE. Aid tl 8r) 7tot ovv dvayKaiov vop.oOeTeLV, 

i7T€l8r)7T€p OVK OpOoTdTOV 6 VOpLOS J dvevpeTeOV T0VT0V 
20 T7]V CLLTLOLV. 

NE. 20. Tiiirjv; 

SE. OvKOVV KOLL Trap V/JLLV 6tCTl TLVES, 0I0LI KOLL €V 



j». 2. 



(join prfikv tcov dvOpuTrlvoov,) 

suffer no art whatever to lay 
down in any matter any simple 
rule which shall be applicable 
to all cases for all time." Cf. 
Theset. 180 a. 

7. in avrb tovto] Sc. to 
cnrkovv ti a.Tro(j)r]vao~8ai irepi dndv- 
twv Km eVt TtavTO. tov xpovov. 

eV ciiito tovto f-WTelvovTa\ 

" Bending all his energies to 
this." 

8. wanep k.t.X.] E. g. the 



Creon of Sophocles. Cf. Antig. 

705-7 «3- 

IO. firjKavTi — iirira^v] "Not 
even if some fresh thing, differ- 
ent from the terms of his en- 
actment, should happen to be 
better for some individual." 
For a-v^aivr] @e\Tiov, cf. infr. 
295 C '. arvp(3aiv6vTcov ciXXcov j3eX- 

TIOVCOV TOIS KlijXVOVCTlV. 

16. 8td ffavTos;] Sc. tov \p6vov. 

2 2. Ovkovv Kai -trap vp.1v] This 

is one of the places where we 



nOAITIKOS. 



139 



94. dXXais TroXtaiv, dOpocdv dvOpMiroov daiojaei?, €M"€ 
7rpos Spofxov etre TTpos dXXo tl, (jjiXoveiKias eueKa ; 

NE. 20. Kai irdvv ye ttoXXolL 

AE. <&€pe vvv dvaXd(3co/jL€i> irdXiv p.vqpir) rots tcov 
re X^t7 yvpLvafyvTCdv €7r travels eV rai? roiavrais dp- 

NE. 20. To Trow// ; 

S*E. 'Or* XeirTovpyeiv ouk ey^copelv rjyovvTou ko.0' 

e ej/<x e/caaTOf, to) crco/jiaTL to irpoarjKOv eKaaTcp irpoa- 

TaTTOvTes; dXXci Tra)(VTepov oLovtcu Seiv cos eVt ro 



Ee who 
trains men 
for athletic 
contest i 
doea not 
adapt hie 

each indi- 
vidual CUSI-, 
(that would 
bo impos- 
sible,) but 
is con- 
tented with 
prescribing 
general 
rules. 



miss the dramatic liveliness of 
Plato's earlier style. The scene 
of these dialogues is a palaestra. 
But this can hardly have been 
pi'esent to the author's mind 
when these words were written. 
Unless the Stranger is sup- 
posed, like the philosophers in 
the Thesetetus, to be wholly 
ignorant of what is going on 
around him. 

I. ddpocov — c5o"K?'^o"et?l Cf. 
Legg. 12, 942 c: ddpoov dc-l Kai 
a/ia Kai koivov tov fiiov o tl jud- 
Xto-ra ndai ndvTcov ylyvs<r6ai. 

aavcijo-eis] The abstract word 
is used, as supr. 264 b : rida- 
creiais tcov Ixdvcov — }(r]vo(BooTias 
— yepavoficoTias. 

4. dva\dj3cop.(v — p.vj]p.rj\ Cf. 

Phileb. 34 b. 

5. appals] The word is used 
in the most general sense. Cf. 
Rep. I, 345 e : ev re iro\niKr\ 
Kai IBitoTiKrj dpxj]. lb. 343 d : 
7rd(rav dp)(r]v } Kad' oaov dpxt]. 
And for the plur., cf. Prot. 

354 b : acoTTjpiai Kai ciXXcov dpxai 

Supr. 293 c, alib. 

7. T6 7roIoz> ;] " In what re- 
spect ?" 

8. XeTTTovpyetv] "To work in 



minute detail." The word is 
used above, 262 b, of dividing 
too minutely at the beginning 
of an inquiry. The only other 
passage where the word oc- 
curs in classical Greek is Eur. 
Hippol. 923, where it is ap- 
plied to subtlety in discourse. 
Another coincidence between 
the language of these dia- 
logues and that of the trage- 
dians. 

10. TTaxvrepov\ Opposed to 
\eiTTovpya.v. " In larger masses. 
More in the gross." Cf. supr. 
277 a-c. Contrast Aristotle's 
view, that the work of the 
gymnast and physician regards 
the individual — fxdWov 8' "icrcos 
ttjv rovoe, Ka6' eKaarov yap la- 
Tpevei. Eth. Nic. I. 4. 

naxvTepov — cos eVt to 7roXu] 
We find an echo of these words 
in the language of Aristotle, 

Eth. Nic. I. I : dyanr^Tov ovv 
irepl toiovtcov Kai €K toiovtcov Xe- 
yovTas naxvXcos Kai tvtvco Ta\r]6es 
ivhe'iKWO-Qai, Ka\ nc-pl tcov cos eirl 
to no\v Kai 4k toiovtcov Xe- 
yovTas ToiaiiTa ml 0-vp.nc-paive- 
adai. 



140 



nAATQNOS 



So the law- 
giver,being 
unable to 
provide for 
ever}' case, 
enactswhat 
is generally 
for the 
best. 



He who 
could pro- 
vide for 
every case, 
could do 
so, while 
present, 



7ToAv KflL CTTl 7T()AA0V<> Tl]l> TOV AvCTlTeAoVVTOS TOIS p. :< y 

crco/iaai iroielaOai ra^w. 

NE. 20. KaAm. 

SE. Aib Si] ye Kal laovs irovovs vvv fiiSovres 

5 6.6 pool's dfia fiev etjopficoaiv, a/xa de Kal Karairavovai 

Spofxov leal 7raAr)? Kal iravTcov tcov Kara ra acopiaTa 

TTOVCOV. 

NE. 2Q. "Eari radra. 

HE. Kat tou vopoOeTrjv rolvvv rjyco/jieda, rov rai- 
\ocriv ayeAais erriaTaTrjaovTa rov SiKaiov irepi Kal tcov 
7rpb? dAArjAovs ^vp,(3oAalcov, firj 7ro#' Ikclvov yevr\- p. 2<^ 
o~eo~6ai rrdaiv dOpoois TrpoararTovTa aKpificos evl 
eKacrrco to 7rpoarjKOv dirobiBovai. 
NE. 20. To yovv cikos. 
15 aE. 'AAAa to tois 7roAAols ye, olfiai, Kal cos €7rl 
TO 7T0\v Kal 7TC0S OVTCOCTl ira^vTepcos eKacrTois top 
vbpov Orjaei, Kal iv ypdpp.acrtv onrodiSov? Kal ev 
dypa/j-paTois, iraTpiois Se eOecri vopcodeTcov. 
NE. 20. *Op6m. 
20 HE. *Opdm fievToi. ttcos ydp av T19 'iKavbs ye- 
voit dv 7T0T€, co ^coKpaTes, coo~Te Sia (3iov del Trapa- 
KaOrjpcevo? eKacrTcp Si aKpifieias irpoaTaTTeiv to irpoa- b 
rJKOv ; eirel tovt av SvvaTO? cbv, cos oipiai, tcov ttjv 



1. rrjv — ra|jz/] "To pre- 
scribe what is profitable for the 
body." 

4. vvv] " As the matter 
stands." Cf. supr. 291 e. 

9. Tai<Tiv dyehais] The Ionic 

form of the dat. plur. occurs 
four times in this dialogue 
(supr. 2 6 1 e, BmXacrioio-i : 291a, 
toiovtoktiv : infr. 304 e, irro/jLe- 
voktlv), and often in the Timaeus 
and Laws. 



12. nacriv] The dative de- 
pends partly on inavov and 
partly on TrpocrraTrovTa dirodi- 
dovac. 

15. to rots ttoXXois ye] Sc. 
TrpQcrrfKuv. 

16. eKaaroLs] " To each na- 
tion." 

17. d-n-odibovs] "Exhibiting; 
prescribing." Cf. supr. dnodi- 
86vai. 



nOAITIKOS. 



141 



95. (3aaiXiKr]v octtictovv ovtco? 67ri(TTiipr)v (lXtjc/wtcov , 
a)(oXrj 7ror' av eavTco Oeir ip.7ro$Lap.aTa ypacpcov 
tovs XeyOevTas tovtov? vop.ov?. 

NE. 20. 'E/c tcov vvv youv, co ije've, eiprjp,evcov. 

HE. MaXXov 8e ye, co (3eXTicrTe, £k tcov peXXov- 1 
tcov prjOrjcrecrOai. 

NE. 20. Tlucop 8r) ; 

S?E. Tcoy Tcucovde. ehrcop.ev yap 8r) Trpo? ye rj/ias 
c olvtovs larpov fieXXovTa rj koli Tiva yupLvacrTtKov dwo- 
8-qp.eiv kou direaeaOaL tcov 6epa7revop.evcov avyvov, coy 
oloito, yjpovov, firj pLvyp-ovevaeiv olrjOevra ra irpoara- 
\6evTa tov9 yvpLvafypcevovs rj tovs Kap.vovTa?, vtto- 
pLvrjpcaTa ypacpeiv av eQeXeiv avTols, 77 ttcos ; 

NE. 20. OtW. 

HE. T/ Se ; €i 7ra/)a do^av eXaTTco -%p6vov diro- 

fypLrjaas eXOoi TrdXiv, dp ovk av Trap eKelva rd 

ypdfipara ToXpar/aetev aXXa VTroOecrOai, $jvp.(3aivov- 

d tcov aXXcov fieXriovcov tols KapLvovcn Sid Trvev/xara rj 

ti Ka\ dXXo ivapd rrjv eXTrida tcov e/c Atoy eWepcos 



by word 
of tnoul li, 
and would 

hamper 

liiiu elf 
with writ- 
ten laws. 

But if such 
an one were 
going into 

a far coun- 
try, he 
would pre- 
scribe, like 

a wise phy- 
sician, what 
on the 
1 whole was 
likely to be 
for the best. 
Yet, should 
the physi- 
cian come 
back sooner 
than he 
expected, 
would he 
not venture 
to contra- 
vene his 
own ordi- 
nance, if 
some un- 
expected 
change of 



3. tovs Xf^^eVras tovtovs vo- 
ixovs] Cf. infr. 299 c : els 817 
ti 8iKaa-Tfjpi.ov, where there is 
the same distant way of 
speaking of what is familiarly 
known. 

8. e'lirapev — larpov k.t.A.] Cf. 
Rep. 6, 488 : vor](Tcopev — vaxi- 

Kk-qpov k.t.X. Theset. 159 b: 

Xeycopev 8f] epe re Kai ere k.t.X. 

" Let us put to ourselves the 
case of a physician, &c." 

9. dnoSrjpdv] The passage 
recals the expression of Scrip- 
ture : " Going into a far coun- 
try." The case of Solon is 
probably in Plato's mind. 

10. at o'Iolto] The optative 



is similarly used in putting a 
supposed case, Rep. 2, 360 b : 
uv8e\s av yevoiTO, a>s 86£eiev, ov- 
tcos aftapdvTivos. 

13. e'8e\eiv~\ Governed by 
eiTmfiev, which must be repeated 
in thought. 

15. Tide; ei] Bodl. ti 81j. 

1 6. nap' eKelva — inro6eo-6ai] 

" To suggest other things not 
contemplated in his former 
prescriptions." 

18. 81a. nvevpara yevopeva] 

" On account of winds or other 
heavenly influences which have 
come unexpectedly out of the 
usual course." Note the alter- 
nation of words. 



142 



IIAATQNOS 



different 

course ex- 
pedient for 

tients ? 



And were 
the law- 
giver, or 
another 
like him, 
to come 
again on 
earth, shall 
he not be 



7Tu>9 Twv €iu)06tu)U ytvofieva, Kaprepcov 8' av r/yoho 
8dv pu) €K(3aiveiv rd uphold 7TOT€ voptoOeryOevTa prjTe 
avrbv TrpoerTCLTTOvTa dXXa fxr/re rbv Kupvovra crept* 
roXficovTa irapd tcl ypa(f)evra 8pav, <w? tolvtol ovra 
5 larpiKa koll vyietvd, rd 8e irepcos yiyvoptva vocrcoSij 
re koll ovk evre^ya ; i] ttolv to tolovtov kv ye erri- 
ar-qprj tjvpLfiouvov koll dXrjOel Teyyr) Trepl diravra 
TravTOLTracn yeXcos dv 6 /leyiaTOS ylyvoiro tQ>v tolov- 

TCOV VOpLO0€T7] flOLTOdV \ 

io NE. 20. YlavTairacri p.ev ovv. 

SE. Ta> 8e rd 8lkcllol 8r] koll dSiKa koll KaXd koll 
ai(T)(pd koll dyaOd koll KaKa ypdyjfavTi koll aypaipa 
vopLoOerr/o-CLVTi toll? rcov dv0pa>7rcov dyeXais, biroaaL 
Kara ttoXlv ev eKacrTais vopLevovrm Kara tovs tcov 

isypatyavTcov vopLovs, dv 6 /xerd Teyyqs ypdyjsa? rj 



1. Kaprepmv — vop.o8eTt]p.aTa>v ;] 
" But would think it right, 
both for himself and the sick 
man, stubbornly to avoid trans- 
gressing the ancient laws once 
given, he giving no new com- 
mandment, and his patient not 
daring to do otherwise than 
was prescribed, accounting this 
the medicinal and wholesome 
course, any deviation from 
which is inartistic and un- 
wholesome : or would every 
such proceeding in the case of 
a science or genuine art, in 
any circumstances involve such 
lawgiving in the most utter 
ridicule V 

2. rot dpxaia vopodeTrjdevra] 

I. e. tci air apxfjs vop.. The par- 
ticiple, as in Soph. Trach. i : 

apxaios (Pavels. 

6. rj nav to toiovtov — T*X v Il\ 

What is at first expressed ge- 



nerally in the nominative is 
resumed in the genitive in a 
more particular form, by a 
change of construction like 
that in Horn. II. Z. 510 : 6 §' 

dy\a'irj(pi nenoidcos plp(pa e yovva 

<pepei. Phsedr. 229 e. Cf. Rep, 
4,^434 a, 7, 521 a, Legg.^ 6, 

75lb: rov — apxat dveTnrrjdeLnvs 
67rio"r7jcra(. — ye Acos av 7rdp.rro\vs 
£vpfiaivoi. Phsedo 6g c, Lach. 
185 a, Xen. Mem. I. 2. 

7. dXrjdel rexvy] True art, 
either as opposed to ip,ireipia, 
mere practice, which pretends 
to the name of art, or as op- 
posed to the profession with- 
out the reality of art. 

7rept dnavTa belongs to £vp- 
ftaivov, TvavraTTao-L to ylyvoiro. 

14. vopevovrat.] "Are herded," 
but with a play on v6jxo<:. Cf. 
Legg. 4, 714 a: rrjv rov vov 8ia- 
vnp.rjv eirovopd^ovTCi vopov. 



nOAITIKOS. 



143 



95 
96, 



TLS €T€p09 O/J.OIO? d(f)LKt]Tat, pi) i^&TTtO 8r) IMpd TUVTU 

erepa irpoaTaTTUV ; ?; koll tovto to drroppypa ovSev 
iyTTOV av €K€ii>ov rfj aXrjOda yeXolov (paivoiTO ; 

NE.20. Tlfl^l 

SE. OlaO' ovv im rw tolovtco Xoyov tov irapa 
rcoi> iroXXwv Xeyopevov ; 

NE. 20. Ovk ivvoco vvv y ovrco?. 

HE. Kat /u?)z/ ev7rp€7rrj9. (fiaal yap 8i) Self, el T19 
yiyvooo-Kei irapd tovs twv epLirpocrOev (oeXriovs vopovs, 
vop.oOe.Teiv tt)v iavrov ttoXlv eKaaTOv TreicravTa, aAAcoy 
hep.1). 

NE. 20. T/ ow ; ou/c SpOco? ; 

SE. 'Io"ws'. a^ 5' ow /x?) 7T6i8g)v tis $La{r)Tai to 

fieXTLOV, aTTOKpLVOU, TL TOVVOpa TYjS (3la? carat ; Mr) 

pAvTOi ttco, irep\ 8e tcov epnrpocrOev irpoTepov. 
NE. 20. Yloiov 8r) Xeyeis ; 



permitted 
to change 

his "\\ 11 

appoint- 

IllOIlt '. 



The cur- 
rent saying 
is specious 
enough : 
"Let a man 
win over 
his state 
to accept 

10 new laws, 
and then 
let him im- 
pose them." 
But sup- 
pose lie 
force them 
on her ac- 
ceptance, 
what shall 

1 5 be said ? 



1. tis erepos opoios] I. e. A 

new lawgiver. Compare Legg. 

II, 926 C : r) prjv irupovra <al 

£(OVTO. aVTOV TOV VOpodeTr/V prjTTOT 

av avayKaaai Trpdrreiv ovtui. 

prj egeo-ro) 8rj] " Must he 
really not be permitted ?" Cf. 
Rep. I, 357 • H-V diroKplvcopai ; 
Legg. 7? 800 e : eiravepaTco — el 
— tov6' fjp.lv — KeicrOco. lb. 6, 7 1 9 

e : norepov pr/8ev Trpocrayo- 

pevrj — dXXa — TptTTTjTai j — e^earai 

corr. F. 

2. rj — (paivoiTO ;] " Or would 
this prohibition not seem in 
reality to the full as ridiculous 
as the former one V 

8. (pacrl yap 8rj Sell/] Cf. 

Legg. 784 c. Pseudo-Zaleuc. 
ap. Stob. (Mullach. p. 543 b): 

'Eav 8e tis ftovXr/Tai tu>v Keipeveov 
vdpcov Kivtlv rj d"Wov elo~<pepeiv 



vopov, els fipoxov e'lpas tov rpd- 
XrjXov Xeyerco rols noWols nepl 
avTov' Kai edv pev y\rrj(pi£opeva>v 
86^rj \eKvcr8at tov vopov r) imdp- 
X ei v tov elo~(pepopevov, /cat avTov 
d8a>ov elvai' edv 8e 5 TTpoxnrdpxcov 
pdXKov 8okj) KaXcos e\etv rj 6 elo~- 
(pepopevos, r) ci8ikos, redvdvai tov 
Kivovvra f) elacptpovTa vopov, em- 
o~nao~8evTos tov /3/jo^ov. 

9. tcov epwpoo-8ev~\ Of the 

men of former time. 

10. vopodeTelv — pr{\ "That he 
should legislate when he has 
persuaded his own state, but 
not otherwise." 

I 5- n"ep V ' 8e Tcov epirpoo-6ev irpo- 

Tepov\ " But answer me first 
with regard to our previous 
instances, i. e. the physician, 
&c." 



144 



nAATQNOS 



it' a |.ii\ i- 

oian forced 
a patient 

to '1" <'"ll- 

trary to 

lion, and 
the treat- 
ment so 
Forced were 
bi -i. would 
ii be called 
iinw bole- 
some treat- 

N ,, more 
should the 
proceeding 

of one who 
forces a 
state to do 
a great 
right con- 
trary to the 
laws be 
called un- 
righteous. 
Nor does it 
make any 



HE. "Aj> ti? apa fxr) TrtiOow tov laTpevo/ievois, p, iy 
t\tov Se 6p0a>? T))i> Te^pi^u, irapd to. yeypa/xpcei/a /3eA- 
TLOV avayKaijj 8pav irulba rj tlvu. avbpa ?; koll 
yvvaiKa, tl Tovvofia r>;? /3/a? karat tolvti]? ; dp ov 
lirdv p.dX\ov i) to irapd ti)i> rt\vr)v Xtyofievov dp.dp- 
Ti]p.u to vocrcodes ; kcu irdvra opOcos ehruv eari c 
TrpoTepov tw /3iaa0eWt irep\ to tolovtov ttXi^v otl 
foacoSi] kcu dreyva niirovOev viro twv fitacrapAvoiV 
IcLTpwv ; 
io NE. 20. ' ' AXrjOecrTOLTa Xeyeis. 

HE. T7 8e rifiiv 8r) to Trapa rr)v ttoXltlki-jv reyyr)v 
dpdpTrjjxa Xeyop.evov Igtlv ; dp ov to alcryjpov koll 
KaKOU koll clSlkov ; 

NE. 20. YlavraTTaai ye. 
iB HE. Tcov 8rj ^Laa6evTu>v irapd ra yeypafi/iei^a 



I. "Av tis tipa firj nci6a>v tov 
uiTpevofieuov] Cf. Legg. 3,684 c: 
Kal prjv rovro yt 01 7roXAot ivpoa- 
TaTTovcri rots vopoBerais, 07rws 

TOIOVTOVS 6l'](T0V0~L TOVS VOflOVS OVS 

enovres 01 dtjpoi koi ra nXr)6rj S«- 
£ovrai, KaBairep av e'i Tt? yvfxva- 
o-rals rj tarpols TvpoaraTTOt p,e8' 
r)8ovr)s Btpanevtiv re Kal Idadat ra 
6epaTrev6p.€va aapara. 

apa] " According to the 
theory we are considering." 

5. irav — voawSes] "Anything 
rather than the error which is 
spoken of as a violation of the 
art, namely unwholesome treat- 
ment." 

6. Kal irdvra — larpmv] " And 

the man who has been com- 
pelled in such a case has a 
right to say anything sooner 
than that he has suffered un- 
wholesome and unscientific 
treatment from the physicians 



who compelled him." 

j 1 . Ti Se — eo-nv] " But what 
is the error which is named as 
a violation of the political 
art?" 

15. Tffli/ 8rj j3ia(rap,eva>v~\ A 

redundant and irregular sen- 
tence. The first genitive is 
resumed in rwv toiovtoov go- 
verned by ■v/z-oyov, which is an 
accusative without an explicit 
construction, but governed by 
dire implied in <pepe. The words 

p.eXXei, KarayeXao-roTaTos, avrm, in 

what follows, are to be referred 
to \j/6yov, which the pronoun 
avTa> resumes in a more definite 
construction. " Now in the 
case of those who are compelled 
to do contrary to written and 
hereditary laws, other things 
more just and better and no- 
bler than their former doings, 
say again of the exclaimcr of 



nOAITIKOS. 



145 



296. /cat irarpta Spdv erepa SiKaiorepa kol dfielvco kou 
d KaXXico twv efxTTpoadev, (f)€p€ 9 tov tu>v toioutqjv av 
\}/oyov irep\ rr}? TOiavrr)? /3/ay, dp', el peXXei fxrj 
KaTayeXaaTOTaTO? elvai iravTcov, wdvra avTw pdXAov 
XeKTtov €KdaroT€, 7tXt}v g>? alcr\pd kol aSiKa kou ; 
kolko: TrtTrovOacTLV 01 (3iaa0evT€? vtto tcov (3iao~a- 
fxevcov ; 

NE. SO. ' AXydearara Xeyeis. 

SE. 'AAA' dpa tdv p.ev ttXovctlos 6 fiiaadpLevos 77, 

Sifcaia, dv 5' apa wivqs, aSiKa ret fiiacrOe'vTa Icttiv ; 

77 kolv 7T€icra? kolv prj ireicras tis, irXovaios rj 7revr)?, rj 

e Kara ypdpp.ara rj irapd ypdpp,ara, Spa *rd ijvp.(f)opo*, 

tovtov dec kou Trepi Tama tov opov eivai tov ye dXrj- 



difference 
whether he 
who does 
so l)e rich 

or poor. 
The light 
of reason 
and science 
determin 
ing what is 
expedient 
and just, is 
the only 
criterion of 
good go- 
vernment : 
and he who 
acts by 
' this light, 
howsoever 
his actions 
may he de- 
scribed, is 
the true 
ruler. 



such men about such violence, 
must not this, to avoid being 
utterly absurd, say everything 
rather, on each occasion, than 
that those who are compelled 
have suffered what is dishon- 
ourable and unjust and evil at 
the hands of those who com- 
pelled them 1 ?" 

Cf. Legg. 9, 875 C : eWi ravra 
eiTrore tls avdpamos, (pvcrei iKavos, 
6ela fioLpa yevvtjdels, tvapa\af$eiv 
bvvarbs e'irj, vopcov ov8ev av beovro 
tcov dp^ovrcov eavrov. imdTrjprjs 
yap ovre vopos ovre rdi-is ov8(pia 
Kpeirrav, ov8e Oepis earl vovv ov- 
8ev6s vnrjKoov ovbe 8ov\ov dWa 
iravTotv apxpvra eivai, enrep a\rj- 
divbs eXevdepos re ovtcos fj Kara 
(pvcriv. vvv 8e, ov yap e&Tiv ov- 
bafjLOV ov8apa>s, dXX' fj Kara. j3pa%v. 
816 8r) to 8evrepov alpereov, rdi-iv 
Kai vopov, a. St) to fiev ws eVt to 
noXv opa (col /3Ae7r«, to S' eVi ttuv 
d8vvare'i. lb. 3, 69 1 C. 

2. (pepe] Cf. Aristoph. Ach. 
541. Stallbaum makes -fyoyov 



dependent on Xeyav 8a. implied 
in XeKTeov. Perhaps rightly : 
but cf. infr. 306 c. 

12. *ra %vp.<popa* ] Most 
MSS. have prj £vp(popa fj £vu- 

(popa. The rest are divided 

between pf] £vpcpopa fj a£vp<popa 

and pri {jvpcpopa. The correc- 
tion is due to Cornarius. Cf. 
Soph. 259 c, Sward, for traces 
of a similar process of cor- 
ruption. 

13. TOVTOV KpiLTTCo] " Hd'ein 

consists the rule of right go- 
vernment as strictly conceived : 
according to which rule the 
wise and good man will order 
the condition of his subjects. 
As the pilot ever watching 
over the interest of the ship 
and her crew, not laying down 
prescriptions, but getting from 
his own mind his art for his 
law, preserves his comrades on 
board ship, so in like manner 
a right constitution of a state 
would be got from those who 



U 



1 K) 



IIAATQNOS 



That can- 
not be 
gainsaid. 



Olvcotcltov 6p6r)<i woAeoos dioiKijaeco?, ov 6 o~o(pos kou 
dyaOo? avrjp SioLKrjaei to tcov dpyop.evcov ; coanep o 
Kvf3epin')T->]? to ttjs vea><? Kfit vuvtcov del ijvpKpepov 
7rapa(j)vAa.TTa)v, ov ypapfiara Tldeis aAAa ttjv Teyyr\v 
5 vop.ov TraptyopLtvos, aco^ei tov? avvvavTas, ovtco kou 
Kara tov clvtov rpoirov tovtov wapd to>v ovtcos dpyeiv 
8vvxp.e'va>v opdi] ylyvoir dv 7ro\iTela, ttjv Trjs Teyvt]? 

pdopLl-jV TCOV VOpLCOV TTOLpeyOpLeVLOV Kpe'lTTCO J KOU 7TaVTCX 

ttoiovctl roh epLffipoaiv dpypvcriv ovk eo~Tiv a/idprr/pa, 
io pceyjUTrep av ev peya <pv\aTT(ticri, to f.i€Ta vov kou 
Te^yqs SiKaioTaTov del SiavepLOVTes toi? ev ty} 7ro\ei, 
aoi^eiv re avTovs olo'l re coat kou dp.eivov9 e'/c yeipovcov 
diroTeXeiv Kara to Svvoltov ; 

NE. 20. Ovk eo~T dvTemelv irapd ye a vvv 
*5 etprjTou. 

SE. K.ou pajv irpos eKeiva ovde dvTippryreov. 



p. 2C 



p. 2C, 



should be able to govern thus, 
and should bring to the work a 
power in their art supeiuor to 

the laws." For nep\ TavTa, cf. 

Theaet. 176 c: ubi fors. le- 
gend, nepl TOVTO. 

5. ovtco — yiyvovr av 7roXireia] 

The clause was at first meant 
to be in apposition with b'pov 
elvai, but in yiyvoir av there is 
a return to the direct form. 

8. na\ navra ttoiovcti — hvvarov\ 
"And the wise governors, what- 
ever they do, can do no wrong- 
so long as they fulfil one great 
condition, — so long as by dis- 
pensing to the citizens justice 
enlightened by reason and 
knowledge, they are able to 
preserve them, and, so far as 
that is possible, to make them 
better." 

IO. pe'xpmep ev peya (pvTuiTTcd- 



trtv] Cf. Rep. 4, 423 e : eav to 

\eyopevov ev peya Cpv\a.TTa>o~i. 
to pera vov — Biavepovres] Cf. 

Legg. 4, 714 a : ttjv tov vov 

biavoprjv enovopd£ovres vopov. 

12. o~d>£eiv ts — Kal dpeivovs 

dnoTeXelv] For, as Aristotle 
afterwards said, the end of a 
city is not life merely, but a 
good life. Cf. supr. 293. 

ofot re wen] In apposition 
with (pv'XdTTcocri. 

14. napd ye — e'lpr/raij " At 

least in contradiction to what 
has now been said." The re- 
spondent wishes to reserve his 
opinion on the main point, like 
Adeimantus in Piep. 6, 487 b: 

Trpos pev ravrd aoi oioels av 0109 

T e'irj avrenrelv aXXct yap . Cf. 

Gorg. 475 e : ov pot. 8oice~i Kara 
ye tovtov tov Xoyov. 

16. eKeiva] P. 292 e. 



nOAITIK02. 



147 



*y7 



NE. 2fi. Ta 7roia etVey ; 

aE. 12? ou/c ai> 7rore 7rXr}$09 ovft cdvtlvoovovv tyjv 
roiavTiju Xafiov €7riaTr)/JLr]i> oiov r av yevovro fiera 
c vov BioiKtiv ttoAlv, dXXd irep\ afUKpov tl koll oXiyov 
/cat to ev €(ttl ^Tiyreov tyjv fiiav eKeivrjV irokLTeiav 
ty)V bpdrjv, ras 8' aAAay \iL\n~ipaTa Oereou, axrirep /cat 
oXiyov irpoTepov epprjOrj, ras jxev eVt tol kclXXlovcl, 
ray be eVt tol alayia) pLLp.ovp.evas TavTijv. 

NE. 212. 11 coy ; tl tout eiprjKas ; ovSe yap dpTL 
SrjOev KCLTepaOov to 7rep\ tcov pLLpypLaTcov. 

£?E. Kat pjrjv ov (j)avX6v ye, av Kivqaas tls tov- 
tov top Xoyov avTOv KaTafiaXr) /cat firj SieXOcov evdel- 
d ijrjTai to vvv yiyvopLevov dfxdpTrjfjia 7rep\ ovto. 



Still leBS 
can the 
former pro- 
position, 
that scien- 
tific go- 

5 vernment 
must of 
necessity- 
be in the 
hands of 
very few : 
and that 
the other 
forms are 
imitations, 

IO more or 
less imper- 
fect, of this. 
This is a 
weighty 
truth, 
especially 



2. ovK covtivcovovv] I. e. Whe- 
ther rich or poor. 

7. ra? pev — pipovpevas rav- 
rr]v\ An epexegetic or redun- 
dant clause. 

9. Has ti tovt c'ipr]Kas\ Cf. 

Leg'g. 12, 968 C : 7TCOS Tl TOVTO 

elprjadai <pa>pev av ; which the 

Zurich editors have pointed 
differently, putting a mark of 
interrogation after iras. If 
this is right, it should be ap- 
plied consistently to all such 
expressions, e. g. nag ; tI tovt 
ernes ; which is of frequent 
occurrence. 

apri] P. 293 e. 

10. 8rj8ev~] "I suppose." He 
had accepted the former state- 
ment, but is now forced to 
confess that he had not under- 
stood it. That Srjdev is not 
always ironical appears from 
Herod. VI. 138 : rt 8rj dv8pa>- 
Bevres 8r)8ev iroir]o~ovo-i ; and 
similar uses of it are more 
frequent in later Greek. Schol. 



Apoll. Rh. (quoted in the Paris 
Stephanus) : to 8r)6ev nore pev 
n\rjpa>pa.TiK6v, 7TOTe 8e cLvt\ tov 

drj'Xabt) 77 as 8tj. Compare the 
use of SrjTTovdev, Phileb. 62 e, Ion 
534 a. Badham, who objects 
to the word, very plausibly 
conjectures prjBev. 

1 1. Kat prjv irepX ui/to] "And 

yet it were a remark of no 
little weight, even if one merely 
threw it out and left it, without 
discussing and making plain 
the error which men now com- 
mit in this matter." 

dv Kivrjcras avTov Kara- 

/3dX?;] " If, having started this 
question, one should leave it 
where he took it up." For 
avTov used metaphorically as 
here, cf. Gorg. 490 : "E^e S?) 

avTov. 

13. to vvv — dpdprr]pa] I.e. 

The capricious defiance of law, 
which is worse even than the 
maintenance of imperfect laws. 
See infr. 300 a, b. 

U 2 



148 



I1AAT0NO2 



when Fol- 
lowed into 
its applica- 
tions : 
u hen by 
in.i\ be 
revealed 
ill.' error 
into « bich 
politicians 
now-a-daya 
are fallen. 
Their best 
course is to 
follow tin- 
traces of 
the p.iTrct 
state which 
have been 
preserved 
in laws ; 
although 
the main- 
tenance of 
law is only 
a second- 
best course, 
and not 
ideally the 
best. 
This ap- 
pears, if we 
consider 
the origin 
of law, as 
we may do 
under a 
familiar 
image. 



NE. 20. Wolov 8/) ; p. 

HE. Totov8e tl Set ye tflTelv, ov irdvv £6vr)0e? 
ovSe padtov ISetV o/xco? pi]v netpcofxeOa Xaftetv avro. 
(j)e'pe yap' bpdrjs rjpuv llovy)? ovarjs TavTiy? rrj? ttoXl- 
5 re/ay, i)v etpi]Kap.ev, oiaO* art ras a'AAa? Set rots- 
tolvti]? auyya.pp.aaL ^pwiievag ovtco acoteaOat, 
Spcoaa? to vvv e7ratvovp.evov, Kaiirep ovk opOo- 
Tarov bv ; 

NE. 20. To TToiov ; 
IO HE. To irapd tovs voptovs p.r]Sev p.r)8eva ToXptav 
irotelv tcov ev ry wbXet, tov ToXp.covTa Be OavaTco 
{ripuovaOai Kal iraai toIs eayarois. Kal tovt eartv e 
bpOoTora Kal KaXXiaT e\ov, u>s SevTepov, eiretSav to 
wpcoTOV TL5 p.€Ta0fj to vvv Srj prjOev. d> 8e Tpoiro) 
15 yeyovos eaTt tovto b Srj SevTepov efprjaaLiev, Stairepa- 
v(op.€$a. T) yap ; 

NE. 20. Haw /xev ovv. 

HE. Ety Sr] Tas etKovas eiravtcopev uaXtv, ah 
dvayKalov diretKa^etv del tous fiaatXiKOvs ap- 

2o\0VTa9. 

NE. 20. no/ay; 



*9 



2. Set ye ^reiv] "We must 
certainly examine — with what 
success Ave may." 

5. tjV elprjKapev] P. 293, viz. 

That which is guided by the 
consciousness of what is best, 
in which, according to the lan- 
guage of the Republic, philoso- 
phers are kings. 

7. ovk 6p66raTov\ Cf. supr. 
294 d : eneidrjTrep ovk opdorarov 
6 vop,os. 

13. as devrepov] Cf. Legg. 

9> 875 c, quoted above. 

eneidav — pr\6kv\ " When 



one has withdrawn from the 
first and best principle, which 
we described just now." 

15. &ianepava>pe6a. r) yap j] Cf. 
Theaet. 173 C : \eya>p.ev 8rj, cos 
eoiKev . 

18. iivavicdp.ev irakiv ] The 
image of the physician was 
employed above, p. 293. But 

the yevvaios KV^epvr^rrjs seems to 

be an echo of Rep. 6, 488 a. 
Cf. also Legg. 12, 963 b, and 
Arist. Pol. III. 2, where the 
virtue of a citizen is infez-red 
from that of a sailor. 



nOAITIKOS. 



14!) 



,;97. J^E. TW yevvaiov KvfiepvrjTrjv koll tov irepcov 
iroWcov olvtol^lov larpov. KaTibtoptv yap 8r) tl 
o~yr)p.a ev tovtols olvtols TrXaaapevoi. 
NE. 20. Ylotiv tl ; 

98. £?E. Toiovde, olov el TravTes nepl avTcov 8tavorj- 
6elp.ev otl BavoTara vn clvtcdv irdcr^opev. ov pev 
yap av eOeXrjacoaLV rjpcov tovtcov eKtXTepoL (reopens, 
6/XOLC09 8rj ct(o(ov(tii>, ov 8* av \cofiao-6ai fiovXrjOcocTL, 
XcofiwvTai TepvovTes Kal KaovTes Kal 7rpoo~TaTTOvT€? 
dvaXcoptaTa (pepetv Trap eavTovs olov (popovs, cbv 
ap.LKpd p}v els tov KoifivovTa Ka\ oi>8ev dvaAicrKovai, 



Suppose 
men, indig- 
nant at the 
harm done 

by the ca- 
price of 
physicians 
and pilots, 

devised a 
constraint 
for them by 
calling an 
oligarchi- 
cal or de- 
mocratic 
assembly, 
where all 
( who chose 
might 
speak, and 
the advice 



1. erepav ttoW&v dvTat-iov] 
Horn. II. A. 514 : 'Irjrpos yap 
avfjp 7roWa)V aurd^ios dWcov. 

2. tl <rxrjp.a Tr\a(rdpevoi\ This 

expression also recals the pas- 
sage of the Republic just cited : 

Sei e/c iroKXap avro f-vvayayelv 
elica^ovTa. 

The unchangeableness of in- 
stitutions is less absolutely 
fixed in the Laws, where room 
is left for partial changes and 
adaptations by constitutional 
means. Legg. 6, 769 : elnore 

tls em.vor)<reie ypd\j/ai re ws ndWi- 
<ttov £mov Kal tovt av prj8eTTore 
eVl to (pavXorepov dW eirl to 
fieXnov 'laxeiv tov etriovTos del 
Xpdvov, £vvvoeis otl 6vtjtos &v, el 
prj Tiva KaTaXefyei StaSo^oj/ — 
ov tolovtov to tov vopoQeTov — 
wpcoTOv pev ypd^rai tovs vdpovs 
— eneiTa — ap o'lei TLva — dyvoelv 
otl TiapnoWa avdynrj TrapaXei- 
TTeaQai Toiavra, a del tlvo. £vve- 
nopevov enavopdovv \ 

3. ev tovtois airots] e'v of 
the material in which one 
works ; as supr. 288 c : e£ &>u 



kol ev ols. 



deferred by the explanation of 
this clause, and the sense is 
resumed and continued in el 8fj 
k.t.X., infra. 

10. olov qbopovs] The physi- 
cian, as being an image of the 
king, is made to assume a 
kingly o- X npa. 

1 1 . crpiKpd — Kal oiSer] " Little 
or nothing." Cf. Theset. 173 e. 
The influence of the following- 
argument appears in Ar. Pol. 

II. 5 '• e '*" yovv T<i>v dXXcov eTTL- 
o-Trjpmv tovto avvevrjvoxev olov 
laTpiKr) Kivrjdelo-a irapd to. Tzdrpia, 
<a\ yvpvao-TLtcr) Ka\ d\(ns at Te\vai 
irdcrai kuI ai 8vvdpeis. Ibid. : 
^ev8os 8e Kal to irapd8eiypa to 
ivepl to>v Texv&v, oi yap onoiov 
to KLve'iv Te^vrju Kal vopoV 6 yap 
vopos la\vv ov8epiav e\eL Trpos to 
ireiQeo-Qai ttXtjv Bid to edos k.t.X. 
lb. III. 1 1 : to 8e t£)v rexveov 
elvaL 8oKel irapdheLypa y\re\)8os, otl 
to Kara ypdppara larpeveadaL 
(pavXav .... enel Kal tovs laTpovs 
orav vnoiTTevcoo'L neLO-QevTas roty 
ex&pols 8ia(p6eipeiv 8ia Kep8os, 
TOTe Ttjv eK T&v ypaupaTcov depa- 
TTeiav £r)Tr]0-aiev av pdXXov. 



5. olov el] The apodosis is 



150 



riAATONOS 



of unpro- 
fessional 
persons 
mighl often 
be pre- 
Eerredj and 
ii\ there 
making 
decrees 
for the re- 
gulation of 
the prac- 
tice of na- 
vigation 
and medi- 
cine, which 
should be 
binding on 
those pro- 
fessions 
for all 
time. 



rots $ aXXois avrol re kou o'l oiKtrai yjpuwTaV kgu p. 2t 
8i] kou TeAevTGovTe? ?} irapac ^vyyevwv ?) irapa tlvu>v b 
e\6pwv tou KapLvovTO? xprjfiaTa puaOov XapifidvovTe? 
aTTOKTLvvvacnv. 61 r au Kv^pvryrai ptvpia ere pa roi- 

5 avra epyd^ovrai, KaraXemovris re eK tivos tTrifiovXrjs 
ev tolls dvaycoycu? epyfiovs, kou ac^aXpara •Koiovvres 
Iv rots ireXdyeaLV €K(3dXXovaii> els rrjv OdXarrau, kou 
erepa KaKOvpyovaiv. el 8)] ravra SiavorjOevres (3ov- 
Xevcratp.eOa irepi avruiv (3ovXr)v tlvol, rovroav tcov 

lore^ycov pLi]K€Tt eTTirpeireiv ap)(€ii> avroKpdropi p.r)8e- c 
repq. ptrjT ovv SovXcov pafjT e'XevOepcov, ijvXXe'ijou 8e 
tKKXr)(riav r)p.a>i> avru>i>, r) ^vpLiravra rov Sr}p.oi> y 
rov? ttXovctlovs p.6voi>, e^eivai Be kou IBmatiov kou rtov 
aXXcou 8-qp.iovpywv irepl re nXov kou wept voaoov 

vbyvcajju-jv ijvpifiaXe'o-Oai, k<xO' 6 ri yjph T01 ^ fya-pp-v-Kois 



i. rols 8' a'XXots] The phy- 
sician's fee is glanced at also 
in Rep. i, 341 c : 6 r<5 aKpi(3el 
Xoyw larpos — norepov xprjpari- 
(tttjs i(TTLV rj Tcov Kapvovraiv 6epa- 
7T(vttjs ; Kat Xeye rbv tco ovti 
larpbv ovra. 

2. rj — ff tivcov] Supr. 261 cl : 

(ocrnep ftorjXdrrjv rj rwa InnoKopov, 

et passim. 

7. eKftdWovcriv] Note the re- 
turn from the participle to the 
indicative. 

10. prjdeTtpa] Bodl. p.r)8erepa 

( sic )- 

11. prjr ovv 8ov\a>v pi)T e\ev- 

de'pav] " No, not over slaves, 
still less freemen." See the 
picture of the slave physician 
of slaves in Legg. 4, 720. 

13. e£elvai he — hrjpiovpycov] 

Sub. anviovv. Cf. Prot. 319 d, 
Gorg. 456. 

KOI l8l(OTO>V KCU T0)V ciXXav 



8qpiovpyS>v] " Other," i. e. than 
physicians and pilots. Cf. 
Protag. 319 c, d. 

15. Kad' o tl XPV erepa rot- 

avra] " What is to be the me- 
thod of using drugs and sur- 
gical instruments in our treat- 
ment of the sick, and vessels 
also, and the tackling of ves- 
sels in navigation, and in en- 
countering dangers, whether 
those incident to the voyage 
in the shape of winds and 
waves, or in encountering an 
affray with pirates, or perhaps 
the necessity of fighting at 
sea with old-fashioned galleys 
against an armada of the like 
build." The words 7rp6s rds — 
Toiavra, though in point of 
meaning explanatory of irepl 
tovs Kivbuvovs, return to the 
construction with naff on xpl 
— XP r ) (T ^ at — 1 "°' J ttXoiois. 



IIOAITIKOS. 151 

298. rjfJ.a.9 kou toIs iarpiKois bpydvots 7rpbs tovs Kap.vovras 

d XPW@ a h KaL $t) KOLL TOLS TtXoLOIS T€ OLVTols KOU TOIS 

vavTiKois bpyavois els Tr\v tcoi> irXoloov yjpeiav koCl 
irepl tovs klv8vvovs tovs re irpos olvtov rov irXovv 
ape/mow kou 0aXaTTi]s irepi kou irpos tols toIs XrjcrTous ?, 
evTev^eis, kou eav vavpLayeiv apa Serj irov paKpois 
ttXolols wpbs erepa tolclvtoC tol 8e tu> irXi)6eL 86^avra 
irep\ tovtojv, ewe tivgjv larpwv kou KvfiepvrjTwv e\r 
aXXcov 18lootcov £vp.$ovXevbvToov, ypco\ravjas ev Kvp- 
fieal Tiai kou o-Tr)Xous, ra be kou dypa(pa irarpia 10 
e 6ep.evovs eOr], Kara tglvt rf8i] navra tov eireiTa 
\pbvov vavTiXXecrdou kou tols tcov kcl/jlvovtoov depa- 
Treias iroieiaOou. 

NE. 20. KopuSfj ye e'lprjKas aroTra. 

3?E. Kar' eviavrov 8e ye apyovTas KaOlaraaOai 15 Then sup- 

. / a ,1 ~ v / ,/> -o,/ pose them 

tov TrXrjUovs, eire e/c tcov irXovcrioiv eire €/c tov or/pov to elect 
iravTOS, bs av KXrjpovpLevos Xayyavr^ tovs 8e Kara- 



annually, 
either by 



The present is of course a and Persians, which alter not." 

wholly imaginary case. The In the same spirit he recals the 

larpav aipeats alluded to in the old word Kvp(3eo~i just below. 
Gorgias, 455 b, is not the de- 8. elV aXKav ldia>Tu>v] " Or 

cision of the question who are else private citizens." The 

to be physicians, but the selec- Platonic use of SXXos already 

tion of certain physicians for noticed. Cf. Gorg. 473 c : vno 

some public duty connected tS>v ttoAm-wi/ koI tS>v a\\a>v £evwv. 
with their profession. Cf. Ar. 11. 77877 tov hrara xpovov vav- 

Pol. III. 6 : So-irep ovv larpbv Set riXXea-dai] Cf. Soph. Antig". 

8i86vai ras evdvvas iv larpols, ovrw 7 I *J '. vnriois Kara GTpe\j/as to 

tovs aWovs ev Tols 6p,olois. Xoinov o~e\p.acriv vavriXXfraL. 

6. paKpoU 7r\olois] The most 15. Se ye] " Yes, and more- 
antiquated kind of fighting over." 

vessel, of which Plato speaks 17. 6s — \ayxdvrj] This seems 

as an English writer of the to refer only to « tov 8r]jiov 

present day might of the old -navros, see infr. e : 77 tS>v — Xn- 

three-decker. He imagines the x° VTas - 

effect of perpetuating such a The practical and speculative 

mode of warfare in written physician are again contrasted 

laws, like those of " the Medes in illustration of the lawgiver's 



152 



IIAATQNQ2 



vote or lot, 

til. is,- to 

whom au- 
thority in 
each de- 
partment 
should l"' 
given. 
Who, when 
their term 
of office had 
expired, 
might be 
summoned 
before an 
unprofes- 
sional 
court, and 
perhaps 
condemned 
and pun- 
ished for 
breaking 
the written 
regulations 
in their art. 
Not con- 
tent with 
this, sup- 
pose them 
to enact, 
that who- 
ever is 
found in- 
quiring 



(iravra<i ap^ovra^ apytiv Kara to. ypdppaTa Kvficp- 

VCOVTa? TGLS VOLV9 KOLl TOV9 KUflVOVTO.? lcop€VOVS. 
NE. 20. Tavr C.TL \aX€7T(OT€pa. 
HE. 0ec3 8rj kou to peTa. ravra eirbpevov. €7rei8dv 
5 yap Si) tcov apyovTcov €k<x(ttois b evtavTo? eijeXOfl, 
Serjcrei 8iKaaTr)pia KaQ'icravTas dvSpcov, rj tcov ttXov- 
ct'lcov Ik tt poK pier eco? rj ijvp7ravT09 av rod 8rjpov tow 
Xa)(bvTa?, ds tovtov? eicrdyeiv rovs aptjavTas kou 
euOvveiv, KarrjyopeLv 8e tov (3ovXbpevov coy ov Kara 
tora ypa.pLpa.Ta rbv eviavTOV eKvfiepvrjcre ray vav? ov8e 
Kara to. iraXaid tcov irpoybvcov eOrj' to. avTa. 8e 
TavTa Kal 7rep\ tcov tov? KaptvovTa? icopievcov. cov 8' 
av KaTayjsrjcpio-Ofi, Tip.av o tl \prj iraOelv avTCov Tivas 
rj caroTiveiv. 
5 NE. 20. Ovkovv b y iOeXcov Ka\ €kcov iv toIs 
toiovtoi? apytiv 8iKaioTaT av otlovv Traa^oi kou 
airoTLvoL. 

HE. Ka\ tolvvv 6tl SerjcreL Oe'crOai vbpov liri iracri 






p. 2(, 



..29. 



art in Legg. 9, 857 d. The 
" slave" says to the true phy- 
sician : Si pcope, ovk larpevets tov 
vocrovvra, aWa o-^eSoi' Traibeveis, 
bj larpov aXX' ovx wf vyirj 8eo- 
ptvov ylyveadai. 

10. eKvfiepvrjo-e'] He passes 

from the general enactment to 
the form of indictment in a 
particular case. 

11. ra avra Be ravra] For the 
ellipse, cf. Theset. 148 b : ku\ 
irepl ra orepea ciWo tolovtov. 

13. Tipav — airoTiveiv ] Cf. 

Legg. 8, 843 b, 9, 875 d, alib. 

15. kcl\ inav] "To hold office 
amongst such people, at least 
when he has the choice." Com- 
pare the representation in the 
Republic (1, 347, 7, 521) of the 



unwillingness of good men to 
rule. Kal implies that there are 
cases in which a good man may 
be compelled to rule. 

18. Kal tolvvv en] " Well, 

further still." 

Kat tolvvv — Berjaei.^ Cf. Legg. 
i, 634 d, e (the Athenian is ad- 
dressing the Cretan and Spar- 
tan) : vp.1v pev yap — fir tS)v koX- 
Xlcttcov av eirj vopav pr) tjjTelv tcov 
veoov prjBeva eav irola Ka\a>s avTav 
rj pr) koXcos fX €l > H- l 9- $ € ^ av l] KQ i 
i£ evbs o-Toparos irdvTas irvp(pa>- 
velv wj Tvavra Kakws Keirac devTcov 
deav k.t.X. And for the ex- 
pression, Legg. 5, 741 e : 7rp6r 
tovtols 8' stl vopos eTTCTai nao-L 

TOVTOLS. 



nOAITIKOS. 



153 



599. TOVTOl?, OiU T19 KV(3€pV)]TlKr]V KOLL TO VOLVTIKOV 1] TO 

vyieivov koll larpiKrjs aXrjdeiav irepl irvevfiaTa re km 
6epp.d koll yf/vxpci ^tjtcov (paii>r]Tai irapa tol ypdppaTa 

KOU aO(f)l,{pp€VOS QTIOVV 7T€pl TO. TOiaVTCl, TTpWTOV plv 

fxrjTe larpiKOV olvtov prjTe KvfiepvrjTiKov bvop.d^Lv 
dAAd pceTecupoAoyov, a8oAeo~)(r)v Ttvd ao(j)LcrTr]v, d6' 
toy BiatyOeipovTa aAAovs vewTtpovs koll avairdOovTa 
c hriTiOeo-Qai KvfiepvrjTiKrj koll laTpiKrj pLrj /cara i>6p.ov?, 
a A A' avTOKpoLTopa? ap\eiv tu>v ttAolwv koll t&v voa- 
ovvtcov, ypatydpevov eladyetu tov fiovAopevov, oh 
ti^ecrTiv, els Srj tl BiKacrT-qpLov. av 8e irapa tovs 
vopiovs Ka\ to. yeypap.peva So^t) ireiOeiv eire veov? 
e'/re 7rpecr(3vTa?, KoAatjtiv tois ia^aTOLS. oi)8ev ydp 



into the 

tlUtll Of 

medicine 

and n.'ivi- 

ion, and 
is therein 

" wise l><- 
yond what 
5 is written," 
lie shall 

first be 
called no 
artist, but 
a dreamer 
or a prating 
sophister, 
and then 
be publicly 
indicted of 
corrupting 
the youth, 
and per- 
suading 
them to 
address 
themselves 



2. Trvev/iaTa] " Winds," as 
affecting health. Cf. supra 
295 d '. {-vpffaivovTcov aWav /3eX- 
tiovcov to"ls Kapvovcri did irvevpaTa 
rj ti Koi aXXo. 

Kai deppd koi yfrvxpd] I. e. the 
more general inquiry which in- 
cludes the subject of winds. 

6. peTeiopoXoyov, ddoXicrxrjv 

riva <ro(pi(TTr]v] See the well- 
known passage, Eep. 6, 48 S e : 

tov cos d\r)8cos Kv^epvr]TiKov ovx 
rjyel av tco bvri perecopocrKOTrov re 
Kal d8o\eo~xrjv koi a^prjcrrov acpicri 
nakelcrdai vno tcov ev rals ovtco 
KartcTKevacrpevaii vavcr\ TvKcoTqpcov. 
The phrase ra peTecepa Ttpdypara 
would apply equally to the 
winds, the subjects of the phy- 
sician's study, and the stars, 
which the true pilot must un- 
derstand. 

HereapoXoyov — 8ia<pdeipovra 
aXXovs vecoTepovs pr) Kara vo- 

fiovs] The indictments of Ari- 
stophanes and Meletus against 
Socrates are here combined. 



In both clauses there is perhaps 
an allusion to the death of So- 
crates. Cf. also Soph. 2 2 5 e. 

7. cos biacp6eipovTa\ This de- 
pends On ypatydpevov. 

9. avTOKparopas ] Cf. supra 
298 C 

avroKparopas apx^iv ] Cf. 
Ar. Pol. I. 6 : dionep ovk avro- 
yvcopovas fieXriov Kptvetv, dWa 
Kara to. ypdppara teat tovs vopovs. 
lb. 7 . 

apxeiv depends immediately 
on neideiv, and is coordinate 
with eVm'0ecr0at, though dXKci 
strictly requires some construc- 
tion dependent on eVtr., e. g. 
the participle apxopras. 

10. tov (3ov~k6pevov, ois e£e<rTiv] 

" Whoever will of those who 
have the legal power." 

11. els 8rj ti 8iKacrTT]piov] Cf. 
Meno 81 C : TeXevTav, 6 S17 dno- 
6vrjcTK€iv KaXovaiv. 

I 2 . yeypappeva\ Sc. ypdppara 
Trepl TOVTCOV. 

13. ov8(v yap 8eiv] " For no 



154 



nAATONOS 



tn tin'.-.' 

sciences in 
a manner 

contrary to 
the laws. 

Lastly, if 
he be found 
guilty his 
punish- 
ment shall 

I >!• <X t I-I'llll ■. 

For no one 

IRvd.s lie 

wiser than 
the laws, 
which he 
who runs 
may read, 
both on the 
public mo- 
numents, 
and in the 
voice of 
custom. 



8eii> tu)u v6fia>v dvai cro(f)U)T€pov ovde'isa yap ayvoeiv p- 
to re larpiKOv Kcii to vyieivov ov8e to KvfiepvmiKov 
Kai vavTLKov' t^eivai yap tw /3oL>Ao/xeW p.av6aveiv 
yeypap.fitva Kal iraTpia 607] Ktlfieva. Tama 8rj irep'i d 

5 re Tamas tcls £irL0-T7)\xa<i el yiyvouro ovtws a>9 Xeyo- 
jJLtv, (6 ^.ooKpaTe?, Kal GTpaT-qyiKrjs Kal tjvp.7racrr)? 
-qaTLVoaovv Q-qpevTLKrjs Kal ypa(f)iKrj$ rj ^vp.Trao~r)9 
fxepo? otiovv fjLifxrjTiKrj? Kal TeKTOviKrj? Kal ^vvoXrjs 
biroiaarovv aKtvovpyias rj Kal yecopyla? Kal tyjs irepl 

lord (fivTct ijvvoAi]? re'^^y, 17 Kal Tiva i7r7ro<popl3iav au 
/cara avyypa/ui/iaTa deaaalpLeOa yiyvopLevrjv rj £v\x- 
7raaav ayeXaiOKopuKrjv rj jiavTLKr)v rj nav o tl fxepos 



one need be wiser than the 
laws." ovSev is adverbial. The 
inevitableness of the philoso- 
pher's fate is again stated in 
the Gorgias, p. 521. 

4. Kai -rdrpia Wrj ] These 

are described in Legg. 7, 
793 0. 

ravra Stj ire pi — Kara re'xvtjv '] 

" If such were the proce- 
dure, Socrates, about these 
sciences, and about generalship 
and the other kinds of hunt- 
ing, or painting and every 
department of imitative art, 
or carpentry and every handi- 
craft, or husbandry and all 
vegetable culture, or were we 
to see an art of horsebreeding r 
or the tending of any herd 
conducted according to written 
rules, or soothsaying, or any 
other ministerial function, or 
draught-playing, or any other 
science conversant with num- 
bers, whether simple, or square, 
or cube, or comprising motion 
— what aspect would be pre- 



sented by a world in which 
everything was done in this 
way, in which written pre- 
scriptions took the place of 
scientific principles'?" 

The Stranger takes every 
opportunity to exercise his 
pupil in recognizing the 
" kindred " between divers 
arts. Many threads of pre- 
vious discussion are here 
taken up. 

6. arparTjyiKrjs Kai — drjpev- 
tik'js] Cf, Soph. 22 2 C, 

227 b. 

7. ypacpiKrjs rj — pepos otiovv] 
He reverts to the accusative 
after 7rep\ (ravras ras eirio-rrjpas 
supr.) in order to avoid the 
confusion of a double genitive. 

For the peprj rrjs pipr]TiKrjs, cf. 

Soph. 235 c. ^ 

9. o~K.evovpyia.s~] Soph. 219 a. 
yeapyia] Ibid. 

10. (7T7ro(£. — dye\aioKop.~\ Su- 
pra, 261 d, 276 a, 

12. paPTLKrjv — oiaKov.] Supra 
290 c. 



nOAITIKOS. 



155 



99. SiaKOuiKT) 7re pielXyfpev, rj ireTTetav r) ^vparacrav dpi- 

OixrjTLKrjv, yjnAyv, e'/re mhre&ov eire iv fidOecnv eire iv 

Toytaiv ovadv 7rov, — irepi diravra raura ovrco Trpar- 

TOfieva tl 7tot dv (Pavelr}, Kara avyypdfxpara yiyvo- 

/xeva kou per) Kara, rtyviqv ; j 

NE. 20. ArjXov otl Traaai at riyyai iravTtXcos 

av 0^0X0^6^ rjpuv, Kal ovSe eiaavdis yevoLVT av irore 

81a tov aTTOKcoXvovTa toutov ^rjTelv vo/jlov ware 6 

(3lo?, gov Ka\ vvv ^aA67roy, els: tov yjpovov iicelvov d(3l- 

4joo. wtos yiyvoLT av to irapdwav. 



What 

would I" 
the result 
of this pro- 
cedure, it' 
applied to 
these or 
any other 
arts? 

Theywould 
simply be 
destroyed, 
and that 
without 
hope of re- 
covery : so 
that life 
would be 
' an intole- 
rable bur- 
den. 



1. TreTTelavj Infr. 292 e. 
7reTTeiav dpi6prjTtKT]v] Cf. 

Legg. 7 j 820 d : coiks yovv r] re 
7rerre/a Kal ravra dXXr)Xa>v ra pa- 
SrjfiaTa ov TrdpnoXv Kexooplcrdai. 
dpidprjTiKrjv, i\riXr)v iv ra^e- 

aiv] Supra 258 c, 284 e. 

2. elr iv (UdOecnv eir iv rd^e- 
<riv\ rdxea-tv Par. E ; iravyzuiv 
ParH. Cf.SUpr. 284 c, rax^ras, 
and note : 294 d, iraxvTcpov : ubi 
Par. F, raxvrepov. Arithmetic 
here includes mathematics, pure 
and mixed. Cf. Legg. 5, 746 e : 
vopicravTa irpos iravra eivai XPW 1 -- 
fj.ovs ras t£>v dpidpcov 8iavopds 
kcu iroiKiXcreis, ocra re avrol iv 
eavTois ttoikiWovtcii kcu ocra iv 
prjKcai Kal iv fiadecri noiKiXpaTa, 
kcu 8r) Kal ev <p66yyots Kai Kivrjcrecri 
rais re Kara ttjv evdvnoptav ttjs 
ava Kai Kara (popas Kai ttj? kvkXco 

7Tfpicpopas. (The last clause 
affords a further comment on 

ra^e'cnv.) 

3. ovTca TTparropeva] Imper- 
sonal. For the form of sen- 
tence, cf. Rep. 4, 434 a : tcktcdv 
— ndvra rn'XXa peTaXXaTTopeva, 
dpd croi civ ri 8oksI K.r.X. In 

connexion with this passage, 



see Gorgias 455 b : orav nepl 

larpav alpecrecos f/ rfj ttoXci ctvXXo- 
yos r) irepi vavnTjycov r/ irepi ciXXov 
tivos 8rjpiovpyiKov edvovs, ciXXo tl 
r) tots 6 prjTopiKos ov crvpfiovXev- 
crei, 8rjXov yap otl iv eKacrTr] al- 
pecrei tov TexvLKaTaTov Set alpel- 
crdai. 

4. koto, avyypdppara yiyvo- 

p.eva] Contrast with this the 
praise of the Egyptian conven- 
tionality in art, Legg. 2, 656 e : 

AG. napct tovt ovk i£rjv ovre £eoypd- 
(fiois ovt aXXois ocroi o~xhl JiaTa Kal 
SnoV ciTTa dncpyd^ovTai. kulvoto- 
psiv ovc? inivoeiv a'XX' arret fj to. 
7rarpta, ovtle vvv 'i^eariv, ovt iv 
tovtois ovt' iv povaiKyj ^vpirdo-rj. 
ctkottuiv S evprjcrfis avTo6i to pvpio- 
CTTov'tTosyeypappiva rj TCTVTrapeva, 
ovx cos enos elneiv pvpiocrTov dXX' 
ovtcos, t£>v vvv 8f8r]p(.ovpyT]pevav 
oi/'re rt KaXXiova ovt atc^ia), ttjv 
avrrjV 8e T€X vr l v dneipyacrpeva. 
KA.QavpaaTOV Xeyeis. AG.Noyno- 
deriKov pev ovv Kal ttoXitikov vrrep- 
(BaXXovTcoc. 

6. AtjXov — to Trapdnav, infr. 
apa ov — KaKov, dpapTrjpaTOS 

jjvyypappaTcov] Note the tragic 
cadence of these clauses. 



X 2 



[56 



IIAATONOS 



Bui things 
would tall 
into -till 
greater 
confusion , 
if i he men 
appointed 

mart ments 
disregard- 
ed them, 

not in the 
interest of 



but of 
their owi 
private 



For the 
laws have 
at least 
some basis 
of experi- 
ence and 
of plausible 
counsel. 
Hence if 
laws are 
made, it 
is best, 
though 
only second 
best, that 
they should 
be en- 
forced. 



HE. TV <5e roSe ; a Kara avyypap.\xaTa fxev av- p. y- 
ayKatpi/iev Zkolcttov yiyveadai tqjv elpi]fjevo)v koll tois 
avyypa.jj.ij.aaiu rj/jaiv e7riaTaTelv tov yetpoTovrjOevTa 
7) Xa^ovra e'/c Tvyr/s, ovtos 8e fn]8ev (fjpovTiQuv rwf 

sypafjfjaToov i] fcepSovs kveKev tlvos 77 yapLTOS i8ia? 
irapa ravra eircyeLpol 8pav erepa, /xrj8ev yiyvcoaKcov, 
dpa ov tov Kaicov tov irpoaOev fiei^ov av en tovto 
yiyvotTO KaKov ; 

NE. 2ft. 'AA^eo-rara. 

10 3?E. Ylapa yap olfiat tov? vofxovs tov? e'/c Treipas b 
7roAA^9 Keifievovs Kal tlvcov ^v/j(3ovXcov eKaaTa ya- 
pi6i>T(o? tjv/jfiovXevadvTcov koll 7reiadvTCov Oe'aOai to 
ttXtJOos, 6 irapd Tama ToXfidw 8pav, d/iapTrjfiaTOs 
dfidpT^fja 7To\\a7r\daiov direpyatpixevos, dvaTpeiroL 

\liraaav av wpaljiv en /jeitpvo? tqjv ijvyypa/jfxaTcov. 
NE. SO. Urn 8' ov pceXXtL ; 

SE. Aid TavTa 8rj toIs nepl otovovv vopiovs koll 
^vyypdjjjiaTa TiOe/jevoi? 8evTepos 7rXov? to irapa c 
TavTa ixr/Te eva firjTe ttXyjOos pL7]8ev fxr)8eiroTe eav 

zo8pav por}8' otlovv. 



IO. Ilapa yap otpai ] The 

sentence begins with an under- 
stood subject, viz. ovtos supra, 
but as the irp6rao~is lengthens 
this is forgotten, and hence, in 
resuming, the article is intro- 
duced : 6 Tvapa ravra roXpiov 
bpav. 

ii. x a P l e VTa >s] I. e. by right 
opinion without science. Cf. 
Ar. Eth. Nlc. I. 3 : ol — X a P l - 

earepoi. 

Pseudo-Zaleuc. ap. Stob. (Mul- 

lach.p.543a): rebv §e Keipevav vo- 
pa>v iav ris 8oKrj prj Ka\a>s neio'dai, 
perariQevat, in\ to fiekriov. pev- 
nvrtov 8e, ndvras neidapxelv' as 



vn avdpimwv pev fjrrao-6ai rovs 
Keipevovs vopovs ov koXov ov8e 
avpepepov, virb be vopov (3e\rlovos 
Tjrraipevov KaraKpareladai na\ «a- 
\6v Ka\ avp<pepov. 

1 8. devrepos nXovs] Cf.Phsedo 
99 b; Phileb. 19 c, 59 c; Ar. 
Eth. Nic. V. 2, 9 ; Pol. VIII. 
2,6. After failing to make one 
course, we tack and try an- 
other. 

t 9. tt\tj6os p.r)8ev ] None, 
whether rich or poor. Cf. 
infr. 300 e : ro ra>v ivkovo-mv 
■jiKrjBos. Note the emphatic 
accumulation of negatives. 



D0AITIK02. 



157 



}oo. NE. 20. 'Opdm. 

AE. Ovkovv pipy para pev av eKaarcov ravra eh] 
rrJ9 a\r}0eias, ra, irapa rcov eldorcov eh Svvapiv elvai 
yeypappeva ; 

NE. 20. n«? $ ov ; 

SE. Kal prjv rbv ye elSora ecpapev, rbv ovrws 

ttoXltlkov, el pepvrjpeOa, iroi)]aeiv rfj re\vy iroXXa 

eh rrjv avrov irpa^iv rcov ypapfxdrcov ovSev (j)pov- 

d rl^ovra, birbrav aXX avrco (3eXrlco So^rj irapa. ra ye- 

ypappeva v(j) avrov /cat eirearaXpeva airoval tlo-lv. 

NE. 20. 'E(papev yap. 

SE. Ovkovv dvr]p bartaovv eh y irXrjdos briovv, 
ols av vbpoi Kelpevoi rvyyavcoo~i, rrapd ravra 6 rt 
av emyeiprjcrcdO-L Troielv cos fie'Xriov erepov 6v, ravrbv 
dpcocri Kara, Svvapiv oirep 6 aXrjOivbs eKelvos ; 

NE. 20. Haw pev ovv. 

HE. 'Ap ovv el pev aveiriar^poves ovres rb roi- 
ovrov Bpcoev, pipeiaOai pev av eiriyeipolev rb dXi]6es, 



Such insti- 
tutions are 
at least an 
imitation 
of the 
truth. But 
IS whoever 
contra- 
venes them 
for the 
sake of the 
general 
good, as- 
sumes the 



2. piprjpaTa — rrjs dXr/Oeias ] 

Compare the account iu Eep. 
6, goo, 501, of the procedure 

of the TToXireicbv £mypa(poi. The 
word yeypappeva here contains 
associations both from writing 
(cf. ypdppara above and eVe- 
araXjiiva below) and painting, 
as appears from the word 

piprjpaTa. 

emo-Tcov — ttjs dXrjdeias] For 
the structure of this, cf. 
Phasdo 65 d : tS>v akXav . . . 
dnavrcov rrjs ovaias. 

3. napa tusv elhoT<ov\ From 
the lips of those who know : 
i. e. dictated by them. Cf. Soph. 
Oed. Tyr. 285 : irap ov tis av 
(TKonoov. Sc. twv xapMTus tjvp- 
PovXevadvTav supr. Cf. infr. 



305 C : irapa vopodeTov fiaai- 
Xecos. 

els Svvapiv elvai ] Like 

to vvv eivai, Rep. 6, 506 e. 
Pro tag. 317 a. Crat. 396 e : 
to pev Trjpepov eivai. 

10. dnovai Tiaiv] I. e. For 
men from whom he should be 
absent. The present is used by 
anticipation for the future, as 
in Soph. 265 d : t<ov ets tov 
eirena xpovov aXXoos nas 8o£a- 
£6vTrx>v. Or, perhaps, because 
the injunctions continued in 
force during his absence. 

13. irapa TavTa — ov] "When- 
ever they do contrary to what 
is written in their laws, in the 
belief that another course is 
better." 



other than 
the law- 
giver in 
person. 
Hence the 
nearest 
approach 
which can 
be made 



158 IIAATON02 

function of pipolvT av p.evTOi ixav /ca/cwy el 5' evTeyvoi, rovro p. 30 

the law- > ,/ „ , , , , \ \ , ~ , 

river. ovk ecrTiv eTi pipy pa, aXX olvto to aX^OeaTaTOV e 

t Inly we , 

have seen exeivo ; 

mass of NE. 20. YlaVTGOS 7T0V. 

poor' or 5 EE. Kal pijv epirpooOe ye aypoXoyrjpevov rjpiv 

competent KtlTai p.7)8eV 7rXr)0O? fJ.rjS' TjVTlVOVV ftwOLTOV tLVOLl Xa- 

to do this. ~. „ / 

And if an (3eLV TeyVIJV. 

individual -vj-17, ^/-j u ~ \ -? 

do this, he WE. 212. Keirai yap ovv. 

can be no >—it? /■>»«» \ v n \ ' ' v 

Ah*. Uvkovv ei pev eari pacriXtKT] tls Teyyr), to 
iotqjv 7r\ovcri(x>v irXr/dos kou 6 £vprras drjpos ovk av 

7T0T6 XafioL TTjV 7ToXlTLKr)l> TaVTTjV €7T LCTTr) fl7]l> '. 

NE. 20. Ha>? yap av ; 

SHE. Aet 8r) tol$ TOiavTas ye, d>9 eoiKe, iroXiTeias, 
^rnmeift ' eL p.eXXovcrL KaXcos ty]v akr]6ivr]v eKelvrjv ttjv tov eVo? 
by states, 15 ytterct te)(vt]9 apypvTOs TroXiTelav eh 8vvap.iv pipL-qcra- p. 301 
the strict aOat, p.r)8eiroTe Keipevav avTols tg>v vop.a>v p.rj8ev 
of the laws -jroieiv Trapa. To, yeypappeva /cat iraTpia edrj. 

etna, cus- 

tomsof NE. 20. KdXXlCTT e'lpTjKas. 

their fore- ' * 

fathers. 3*E. OrCCZ/ a/JOC Ot 7rX0VCTL0l TaVTTJV flL/JLCOVTai, 

rich do so, 20 rore apicrTOKpaTiav KaXovpLev ttjv TOiavTrjV ttoXl- 

itiSarl " ' . « ' *v «* / v , ;*. », 

stocracy; TeiaV OTTOTaV 0€ TCOV VO/100V /XT) (bpOVT^COCTLV, oAl- 

when they , 

neglect the yapyiav. 

oligarchy. NE. 20. K^oWeuet. 

When one _ Vf , 9 ^ „ x , 

rules ac- A Hi. i\.cu /x?;^ oiroTav av ^tis* eis apxy Kara vo- 

cording to , \ y / a « / » „ 

law, it is 25 p.ovs, pLip.0vp.ev09 tov eiricrTr]pova, paaiXea kclAov- 

royalty; > 5, ,y. , , x » > / * 

when in \**V, Of OLOpiCflVTeS OVOJJLaTl TOV p.€T eTTLaTyfXrjS Tj h 

spite of jv 1 >- \ / 

law, falsely 00^77$- /car a i/o/iow p.ovapxovvTa. 

1. 7rai/] Cogn. or adv. ace. 24. av *ns* ] MSS. aWiy. 
as in irav Tovvavrlov. Cf. Legg. The correction is due to 
4, 718 e : 7rac dyanrjTov. Badham. Cf., however, Soph. 

2. ovk — ert fi'ifirjfia] Cf. Soph. Trach. 1 234: flJ]Tp\ fiep Baviiv 
240 a : erepov 8e Xe'yets rotovroj/ — aot t avBis as e\fis e^etv. 
aKrjdivov ; Cratyl. 432 C 26. rj bogrjs Kara vopovs] The 






nOAITIKOS. 



1 5<) 



3° 



i. NE. 20. ¥>.Lv8vvevopLev. 

SE. O^/COW KOLV TLS apa €7rKTT7]/JL(Ol> 0UTC0S OiV CIS 

ct-PXy? iravTcos to ye bvopa tclvtov (3ao~iAevs kcll ov8ev 
eTepov 7rpoo-pi]@i]creTai' 81 a 8rj to. ixevTe bvopaTa 
rcov vvv Aeyop-e'vcov iroXtTemv ev pcovov yeyovev. 5 

NE. 20. "Eot/ce yovv. 

SiE. Tt 8' otolv prjre Kara vop.ovs p.rfe Kara edrj 
c irpaTTrj tls els ap^cou, irpoairoLrjTaL 8e eocnrep 6 eiri- 
aTypLcov, w? apa it apa. to. yeypappeva to ye /3e'A- 
tlcttov 7roir)Teov, rj 8e tls eiriOvpua kol ayvoia toutovio 



affecting 
wisdom, 
tyranny. 
And when 
one rules 
by wisdom, 
and is su- 
perior to 
the laws, 
this too is 
royalty, but 
in a sense 
which an- 
nihilates 
the other 
so-called 
govern- 
ments. 



words koto, vopovs are a limita- 
tion of fiera 86£r]s — povapxovvTa, 
not of e7naTi]ij.T]s, and distin- 
guish the constitutional mo- 
narch from the tyrant. 

4. 6Y a 8fj — yeyovev] "Where- 
fore we have found that the 
five names of the constitutions, 
of which men now speak, 
are resolved into one only." 
Badham corrects A (i.e.rerra/ja) 
bfj Ta 77evre ovo/xara to>v Xe- 
yopevcov trokireiaiv povov yeyovev. 

But how can the five have be- 
come four, when the fifth kind 
immediately reappears ; and 
all five are enumerated just 
below? It is true that the 
distinction of knowledge or 
ignorance (or of the better 
and worse imitation of know- 
ledge) is substituted for the 
distinction between persuasion 
and force. But this applies in 
a measure to apio-TonpaTia and 

oXiyapxla as well as to PaaiXeia 
and Tvpawis. The true fiao-ikevs 
is only introduced here in 
order to define the tyrant who 
affects to act the same part ; 

and the words Si' a — yeyovev 

recall the assertion of supr. 



293 c, that the government of 
knowledge was the only go- 
vernment (8ta(pep6vTa>s 6p6i)v ml 
p,6vr]v iroXireiav), and the rest 
not governments but imita- 
tions of government, some 
better and some worse. Cf. 
also supr. 300 e : ttjv ahrjdtvriv 
eneivrjv, ttjv tov evos. pera rexm/s 
apxovros. infr. : tov eva iicelvov 
povap^ov. 302 e : ttjv opdrjV £77- 
Tovo~i tovto to rprjpa ovk r/v 

Xprjo-ipov. For vvv, cf. 291 e: 

irpbs to (Hiaiov ivov <a\ eKovaiov 
<inoo~KOTrovvTes vvv — Tvpocrayopev- 
ovaiv. Legg. 4, 714b: 7ro\iTeiS>v 

apTi 8ieXr]\v8apev oaa Xeyov- 

o~iv ol noXXoi. 

8 . wpoo-ivoirjTai — eTno-Trjpcov ] 

Sc. npaTTetv. Compare the el- 
lipse of the infinitive after <pai- 

vopai, eldov, &C. 

acrnep 6 eTrio-Trjpcov] Sc. npar- 

TfLV. 

9. to ye PzXtio-tov ] I. e. 
Although in all else the laws 
be observed. 

10. emdvpla re Ka\ ayvoia — 
rjyovpevT]] Cf. Rep. 8, 554 b : 

ov yap av TV(fiX6v -qyepova tov 
Xopov io-TrjcaTo na\ eWipa paXio'Ta. 
Compare also the picture of 



]f>'() 



rTAATONOS 



The reason 
of these 
forms i*, 
that the 
true mon- 
arch is no- 
where to 
he found : 
and men, 
despairing 
of his ad- 
vent, have 
had re- 
course to 
convention 
and law. 



tov pi.pyp.aTO? ijyovpevr/, p.cov ov tot* tov toiovtov p. 30 
tKaorrov Tvpavvov k\i]T€Ov ; 

NE. 2Q. TV p.i]v ; 

3E. Ovrco 8rj Tvpavvos re ye'yove, (frapev, /cat 
5 fiacrikevs /cat oXiyapyjia /cat upiaTOKparia /cat 8r]po- 
Kparia, hvaytpavavTozv tcov dvOpcorrcov tov eva eKel- 
vov povap^ov, /cat aV laTrjaavTcov prjhiva rr)? TOiavrrj? 
dpXV? d'tjiov av yeveaOai irore, ware lOeXeiv /cat d 
SvvaTOV elvai fierd dperi}? /cat einaT-qprj? apyovTa rd 
10 diKaca /cat oaia hio.vip.ziv opOco? 7racrt, Att>/3aa-#at <5e 
/cat cmoKTivvvvai /cat kolkovv ov av fiovArjOfj eKaarore 
rjp.cov' eVet yev6p.evov y d.v olov Aeyopcev, ay air da Boll 
re av /cat oIk€lv dLaKvfiepvcovTa evdaLpovcos opdrjv 

aKpificDS pLOVOV 7T0\lT€LaV. 

15 NE. 20. llwy tfou; 

HE. Nw £e ye birore ovk eart yiyvopevos, a>? 8rj 
(fiapev, iv rai? iroXecn ^aaiXev? o!os iv o-pLrjveo-iv 
ipKpverai, to re acopia evOijs /cat ttjv ^vyr^v oia(pipcov e 



the individual in a state of 
" tyranny" in book 9, esp. 572 
e, sqq. 

4. K(ii Pacrikevs] In the former 
of the two senses mentioned 
above. 

7. Ka\ CLTnarr-qaavrav] Com- 
pare the language of Aristotle 
and of Plato himself in the 
Laws, already quoted supr., 
notes on pp. 294, 296. 

10. XeofiacrSai Se] Sc. fjyov- 
fievcov navTa riva av, supplied 
fl'Oni dm<TTr)(rdvTcov [irjdeva av, 

supr. Cf. Soph. Ant. 263 : 
alib. 

I 2 . dyando-dai — av ] He 

would be welcomed. Cf. Rep. 

6, 499 e : 12 /xaKapie, *}v S' eyco, 



fxtj ndvv ovTu> rS)V 7roWa>v Ka- 
rrjyopei, dXXolav rot 86t-av e£ovo~i.v 
k.t.X. 

14. fiovov] Masculine. Note 
the inverted order and tragic 
rhythm. 

1 6. onoTe ovk eari yt.yv6p.evos] 
" Since there does not arise a 
king in states as in hives (at 
least so we think), one un- 
mistakeably surpassing both in 
body and mind, it follows that 
we are obliged to meet and 
make enactments." For this 
meaning of Snore = quoniam, 
cf. Euthyd. 297 d, and com- 
pare Ar. Pol. III. 8. 

18. to re oSijia evdvs] I. e. 

At the first glance, before his 



110AITIK02. 



161 



{oi. eis, Set 8rj avveXOovras ^vyypdppara y parens, &>$■ 
eoiK€, pLtTadeovTCLS TO. 7-779 d\r)0€<JTa.Tr)s TToXureiav 

NE. 2Q. Ktvdvvevei. 

HE. Qavp.dtpp.ev drjra, co ^coKpare?, kv rah roi- 
avrats 7roXireiai$ 6o~a ^vpftaivei ylyveadai KaKa koii 
oaa ^vpfirjaerai, roLavrr)? tt)s KpY]7r18os vTroKeipevr)? 
avrai?, rrjs Kara ypdppara Ka\ eOrj pi) perd eVncrr?;- 
prjs irparrova^ ray irpd^eis ; erepa TTpoo~y^pu>pevr) 
502. iravri KarddrjXo? d>9 irdvr dv SioXe'aeie rd # eV carry* 
yiyvoptva. r\ Ikuvo i]piv Oavpaareov paXXov, d>9 
iayypov ri ttoXis earl (Pvaei. ; irdaypvaai yap 8rj 
roiavra at 7roX€is vvv yjpovov airepavrov, opens euiat 
rives avrcov p6vtp.oi re elcrt K.a\ ovk avarpeirovrai' 



5 And do 
we wondi 1 

that ninny 
evils should 
arise in 

states thus 
based on 
ignorant 
custom ? 
Ought 
10 we not 
rather to 
admire the 
strength of 
the social 
bond which 
can endure 
this strain ? 
For there 
are still 



mental qualities can be known. 
Cf. Ar. Pol. VII. 13 : El pev toL- 

vvv t'irjcrav toctovtov 8ia<pepovTes 
arepoi twv aXkcov, oo~ov tovs deovs 
Kai tovs rjpeoas rjyovpeda dvOpancav 
8ia(pepfiv, cuGus npSiTov ko.t<x to 
crwfjia ttoWtjv exovres VTrep(3o\r]i' : 
fira Kara ttjv yjsvxrjv, wore dvap,- 
Cpta^rjrrjTov eivai (cat (pavepdv ttjv 
vnepoxrjv rots apxopevois ttjv tS>v 
dpxdvTcov, 8r/Aov on j3e\riov alel 
tovs avrovs pev cipxciv tovs S' 
apxeo-6ai KaBaira^' inel 8e tovt 
011 pa8iov kajSelv, oi8e eartp, 
ao-wep ev "lv8ois Cprjal 2kl»Aci£ eivai 
tovs (3acri\eas toctovtov 8ia<pepov- 
Tas tS>v dpxop.ei'a>v, qbavepov, k.t.A. 
2. peTctdeovTas — "x vr l ] Cf. 
Soph. 226 a : Toiov8e ti peTade- 
ovTas 'lx vos 0-vtov. Perhaps 
there is a slight allusion to the 
Homeric per Ixvia ^alve Se'oio. 
Cf. Phffidr. 266 b. 

7- TTJS KpT]7Tl80S TTjS 7TpOT- 

Toio-rjs ] Viz. a responsible 
executive. 



9. irepa^ Sc. dpxrj, 01' re^i/r;, 

which is naturally suggested 
by the preceding argument. 

irpocrxpoypevj] ] Sc. toiovtt) 

Kpr)Tr"i8i. Stephanus conjectured 
27 from the version of Ficinus : 
quo si alia qusedam gubernatio 
vel civitas utatur. But for 
the asyndeton, which is as- 
sisted by ttcivtX K.aTa8rfKos as a 
kind of particle, cf. the usage 
with 7rdvT(0s, e. g. supr. 268 e. 

Badll. COllj. 7rpaTT0vcrr]s, f) rrpdgis 
erepa. 

10. *ra €7r' avTjj* ] MSS. 
tcl TavTT], Badh. corr. Tan avTJj. 
Qy. vtt' aiirf] 1 

11. ens Icrxvpov ti ttoXis eori 
(pvaei] Compare Lcgg. 4, 708 
e : efieXkov ~keyeiv cos ov8els Trore 
dvOpomcov ov8ev vop.o8eTei, Ti>xai 
8e Ka\ £vp(popa). navTolai ninTov- 
crai TravTolcos vapodtTovcri tci 
Trdi'Ta rfplv. 

14. p6vip,oi\ E.g. Sparta. Cf. 
Legg. 3, 686 a, b. 



1 62 



HAATONOS 



i-it 'us 01 
men which 
have exist- 
ed from 

uiikiiou D 

time, 

though 

many from 
age to age 
are seen to 
founder, 
like ships 
at sea, 
through 
the preten- 
tious igno- 
rance of 
their pilots 
and mari- 
ners. 

Now let us 
ask which 
of these 
bad go- 
vernments 



noXXai jii]v evlore /cat Kaddirep irXola Karadvo/JLevai p. 31 

SloXXvVTOU KOLL 8loX(o\rX(TL KCU €TL SloXoVVTCU Sid T1)U 

tcov Kv(3epvi-)TU)V /cat volvtwv fioyQ-qplav tcov irepi tol 
fJL€yi(TTa /jL€ylaTi]v ayvoiav elXifyoTcov, o'l wept ra no- b 
sXiriKa kolt ovoev ytyvcoaKOvres rjyovvTai Kara irdvTa 
aa(pearaTa iraacov liriaTr]p.Q>v ravrrji/ eiXrjcpevai. 
NE. 20. ' AXi-jOlaTara. 

AE. Tt9 OVV St] TCOV OVK 6p0COV TToXlTCLCOV TOVTCOV 

rJKiara )(aX€7rr) avtrjv, iraacov ^aXeircov ovacov, /cat 
10 tls fiapvTdrr) ; del tl KaTide'iv 77/xaV, Ka'mep irpos ye 
to vvv irpoTeOlv rj/uv irdpepyov Xeyo/xevov ; ov firjv 
dXX! e'ls ye to oXov 'laces 7rdv@' eveica tov tolovtov 
irctvTes Spcojiev \apiv. 



1. 7ro\\a\ p.rjv — elXr](pevai ] 
" Many however also from time 
to time are seen to founder 
like ships at sea, and thus are 
perishing, have perished, and 
shall hereafter perish, because 
of the vileness of their pilots 
and crews ; men guilty of the 
greatest ignorance on the 
greatest subject ; who, having 
absolutely no inkling of po- 
litical science, believe them- 
selves at all points above all 
other sciences to have master- 
ed this." Compare the de- 
scription of the " ship's crew" 
in Rep. 6, 488. 

KaOdnep irXola] Cf. Legg. 
6, 758 a '• vavs re iv Bakatrar} 
TrXeowa — noXis Se axravrcos iv 
kXvScdvi todv aXXcuv noXecov. 

2. 8i6X\vvraL — 8ioXovvTai ] 
Cf. supr. 268 e ; Tim. 22 c; 
Legg. 3, 676 b; 688 d. Hdt. 

3. to. jueytcrro] Sc. to. 7to- 

\iTiKa. Cf. Legg. 3, 688 c : 



rfj XoiTTT) re 770077 KaKia 8ce<p0ap- 
fieva, fidXtara 8e rfj nep\ ra 
[liyiara twv dvOpcoTrlv&v irpay- 
p-drav dpadla. Rep. 6, 5°4 e : 
tcov 8e p,eyiaTCOV p.r) [ieyt(TTas 
d^iovv elvai tcls aKpi[3eias. 

4. p.eyio~Tr]v ayvoiav ] I. e. 

the conceit of knowledge. Cf. 

Soph. 229 C: dyvoias — eldos, 
TTaat rols aXXois avTr/s dvTio~Ta6- 
fiov uepecriv. 

5. nar oibev] Opposed to 

Kara irdvTa. 

9. x a ^ e7r *l <TV Cv v ] Like 
^aXe7roi crvyyeveadai, Rep. I, 

33° c. 

11. ov p.fjv — X ( *P LJ/ ] Cf. Ar. 
Eth. Nlc. II. 3 : to TeXos ov yva- 
cris aXXa Trpdgis. 

12. eveKa — x<*P tv ] Cf. Legg. 
3, 7 01 d : to tlvos 8r) x°-P lv 
eveKa Tavra eXex@1- 

TOV TOLOVTOV ] Not TOV 

irapepyov (Stallb.), but "for 

the sake of making life toler- 
able." 



nOAITIKOS. 



163 



;o2. NE. 20. Aer ttcos 8" ov ; 

c SE. T?}^ avTi]v tolvvv (j)d6i rpuou ovcrcov y«Ae- 
7rr)v StafapovTCos ylyveaOaL koll paarrju. 
NE. 20. riw? 0i}y ; 

HE. Ovk aXXco?, 7rAr)v povapxiav (jyrjpCt koll 6Xl- , 
ycov cLpxh v K ® L ttoXXcov, dvaL rpel? ravras rjpiv Xeyo- 
ixevas tov vvv iwiKexv/JLevov Xoyov kolt apyas. 
NE. 20. 'Haav yap ovv. 
£JE. Tauray tolvvv 8lya Tep.vovT€? p-lav eKaarrjv 

eij 7T0LcdpL€V, TY)V 6pOr]V X^pi? tX7TOKp[vaVT€9 TOVTCOV 

efiSofirjv. 
d NE. 20. Ilwy ; 

S*E. 'E/c filv TTJ9 novapxtas fiaorLXLKrjv koll rvpav- 
vlkyjv, e'/c <5' av tcov /jltj iroXXtov tt)v re evcovvpov 
eLpafxev eivoiL apLo-TOKparlav koll oXiyapxioiV e'/c 8* av 
tcov 7roXXcov tote fi€v airXrjv eirovopLa^ovTzs eTL0epev 
SrjpoKpaTLav, vvv 8e av koll TavTrjv rjplv Oeriov eVrt 
SnrXrjv. 

NE. 20. Tied? $r) ; /cat t'lvl SiaipovvTe? TavTrjv ; 

£?E. Ov8ev 8La(p€povTL tcov dXXcov, oi)8 el rou- 



ts the least 
intolera- 
ble ! The 

same under 

different 

conditions 

is the worst 
and the 

least bad. 
For of the 
three men- 
tioned — 
monarchy, 
the rule of 
few, and de- 
mocracy — 
each may 

Q he divided 
into two, 
so that the 
forms, in- 
cluding the 
best and 
only form, 
are seven 
in all. 
Under 

g monarchy 
we have 
already dis- 
tinguished 
royalty and 
tyranny : 
under the 
rule of few, 
aristocracy 
and oli- 



garchy. 



5. Ovk aXkcos k.t.A.] " I only 
revert to what I said before. 
I say that monarchy, the rule 
of few, and the rule of many, 
were the three forms of go- 
vernment of which we spoke 
at the beginning of this new 
discussion." 

7. tov vvv — <ar dpxds] Cf. 
Legg. 7, 793 b : 6 vvv Sij Ad-yoy 
tjfxiv emxvdds. Cf. Rep. 1, 344 

d : couirep (Sakavevs rjpcov Karav- 
TXrjcras Kara tcov cotcov cidpoov Kal 
Trokvv tov \6yov. Soph. 264 C : 
en pel^cov Karexvdr] crKOToSivia. 

See also Legg. 3, 682 a : tov 



VVV €7Tc\d6vT0S Tjixlv p(l6oV. 

14 — 16. tcov prj ttoXKcov TCOV 

7toXXoji/] Abbreviated for tijs 

TCOV prj TT. TTjS TCOV IT. 

1 4. evcovvpov] " Of auspicious 
name." Compare the turn of 
the sentence in Rep. 8, 544 d : 

Kal »; yevvaia drj Tvpavvls Kal Tra- 
acov TOVTcov 8ia(pepovcra. 

20. OvSev dicKpepovTi] By the 
same mark as in the other 
cases. Lit. " By a mark in 
nowise different from the 
rest." 

01)8' 61 TOVVOpa Ta.VTt]S ] If 

we translate, " Even though 



Y 



164 



HAATONOS 



vopa rj8i] 8nrXovi> e'trri tuvti]?' dXXa to re Kara 
vo/jlovs dp^eip kou Trapavo/ioos eaTi kul tcivty) koll 
tolls aXXat?. 

NE. 20. ' Ectti yap ovv. 

5 SE. Tore p.\v To'ivvv T7)v 6p6i]v (iiTovai tovto to 

TfiijpLa ovk r)v xprjai/Aov, coy eV toIs irpoaOev dire- 

Sel^apev' €7T€i8r) 8e e^e'iXoptv eKeivrjv, tos 8' aXXas 

6@ep.ev dvayKalas, Iv tolvtolis 8r) to irapa.vop.ov koll 

eVVOpLOV 6KaO~T1]V 8i)(0T0p.ei T0VT03V. 

io NE. 20. 'Koike tovtov vvv pr)6evT09 tov Xoyov. 
SE. Movapxia tolvvv ^ev^Oelaa p.ev ev ypdppacnv 
ayaOols, ov? vop.ov$ Xe'yop.ev, apio~Trj 7raaoou tuiv e£* 
avopios 8e ^aXeirii kou (3a.pvTa.TT] ^vvoiKijaai. 
NE. 20. Kiv8vvevei. 
15 HE. Tr)v 8e ye tcov p.r) ttoXXcdv, wairep evos kou 



P- 3°3- 



the name of this constitution 
is already twofold," this seems 
inconsistent with 292 a. But 
Stallbaum ingeniously suggests 
that Plato here alludes to 
a distinction, which, though 
not in common use, had been 
invented by some philosopher. 
Still it is difficult to see the 
bearing of the clause when 
thus interpreted. Something is 
required in which democracy 
may be seen to differ from 
the other names. And this is 
supplied by the accidental dif- 
ference that democracy has a 
twofold meaning, is one word 
for two things, whereas in 
each of the former cases there 
was a name for either side of 
the division. " Even though, 
when we come to democracy 
(?j8r] ravT-qs), we find that the 
name has a twofold mean- 



ing." Cf. Pheedr. 244 a, twr- 
\ovv. 

5. tovto to Tfirjpa ] This 

section, viz. the distinction 
between the use and neglect 
of law, which was shewn to 
make no essential difference 
in the conduct of the perfect 
ruler. Supr. 292, sqq. 

6. a>s iv tols Trpoo~9ev dne- 
deiga/iev] It has been shewn 
that questions of law are in- 
different to the ruler who 
has perfect knowledge. Supr. 

293- 

8. dvayKaias] I. e. Such as we 
are compelled to put up with. 
Compare dvayKaias, e. g. Rep. 
7, 527 a: \iyovo~i — •yeAcuW re 
Ka\ dvaynaioiS. 

1 1 . ^evxdelo-a pev iv ypappacnv 

dyadols] " Subject to a yoke 
of good prescriptions." 

15. a>ff7rep evos Kal tt\tj6ovs to 



nOMTlKOS. 



1()5 



•03. 7r\r)0ovs to 6"hiyov fxeaou, ovtws yyrjcrcofxeOa fxiarjv 
in ap(f)OTepa' ttjv 8' av rod ttXtjOovs Kara iravTa 
aaOevrj koll pifiev LirjTe ayaOov Lirjre kolkov fieya 
8vvapevrjv d>? vrpos ras aXXa? 8lcl to tols ap)(a? Iv 
TavTY] ftiaveveprjadai kcltol a/j-iKpa eis 7roXXov?. 810 
yeyove Tracrwv filv voplpcov tcov iroXLTtLwv ovawv 
tovtwv )(€ip[o~Trj, irapavop-wv 8* ovo~(iov ^vpiraawv 
b (3eATio~Tr)' koll aKoXaaTcov pev iraawv ovacov kv 
SrjfxoKpaTia vlko. (r)i>, KoafiiodV 8' ovawv tJklo-tcl Iv 

TaUTT] (3lQ)T€0l>, Iv Tjj irpCdTYf 8e TToXv TTpWTOV T€ KOLL 

apLo~Tov, irXr/v tyjs e(38oprj?' iraatoi' yap iKeivrjv ye 



cracy are 
interme- 
diate, and 

democracy 
in the least 
powerful 

for good or 
harm. 

5 Whence a 
democracy 
is the worst 
of law- 
respecting 
communi- 
ties, but the 
least bad 
amongst 
those which 
despise the 
laws. 
Still, there 



oKlyov peo-ov ] There is a 
Pythagorean tone in these 
words, similar to that which 
is observable in the Politics of 
Aristotle. 

4. 81a. to tcis dpxas — els ttoA- 
Xovs] The remarks of Aristotle, 
that much water is less easily 
fouled than little, and that bad 
influences in a democracy are 
neutralized by admixture with 
wholesome elements, as in the 
case of food, have an analogy 
with this observation of Plato. 

8. Ka\ aKo\do~TG>i> pev — /3ico- 

reoi>] This opinion is quoted 
by Aristotle as that of one of 
those who had gone before 
him. Pol. IV. 2 : ttjv rvpawida 
Xeipio-Tr)v ovaav, nXelo-rov dnexeiv 
7To\ireias. Aevrepov 8e ttjv oXt- 
yap\iaV t] yap dpiaroKpaTLa 6V 
to-TrjKiv dnb ravr-qs ttoKv tt)s 
noXirelas' perpiwTarTjv 8e ttjv 
drjpoKparlav. "H8tj pev ovv tis 
d7rt(pr]vaTO kcu rav irporepov 
ovto), ov prjv els tcivto fiXeyj/as 
i)pAV' enelvos pev yap eKpive, ira- 
(tcov pev ovacov eTnemav, oiov 
6\iyap\las re XPW T *1 S Kal T ™ v 
nXXoov xeipio~Trjv bqpoKpariav, 



t£>v be (pavXwv dpl<TTT]v. 'Hpe'is 
8e oXcos ravras e^paprrjpevas 
eivai (papeV ko.1 j3eXria> pev 0X1- 
yapxlav aXXqv aXXrjs ov KaXcos 
e^ei Xe'yeiv, tjttov 8e (pavXrjv, 

See also ib. c. 4. It will be 
observed that the last words 
exactly express the doctrine 
of the Politicus : so that if 
Aristotle is alluding to this 
dialogue he has misunder- 
stood the author's meaning. 
This does not prove that he 
does not refer to this passage, 
but it does tend to shew that 
he is quoting loosely without 
thinking of the context, and 
perhaps without distinctly re- 
membering the author from 
whom he quotes. tis t£>v 
Trporepov is certainly a cu- 
rious expression for him to 
use, if he remembered that he 
was quoting Plato. But the 
saying may perhaps be older 
than either of them. See 
Introduction to the States- 
man. For the infinitive, as 
subject of vim, cf. Soph. (Ed. 
Col. 1225 : pfj (pvvai tov anavra 
viKq \6yov. 



166 



11AAT0NQ2 



18 do com- 

pari -on be- 

t « sen even 

c. institu- 
tional roy- 
ally ami 
the ideal 
state. 
None of 
these forms 
deserve the 
name of 
govern- 
ment : and 
their up- 
holders are 
not states- 
men, but 
factious 
partisans. 
AVe have 
done, then, 
with this 
" crew of 
Centaurs 



eKKpLT€oi>, olou 6ebi> e£ uvOpo'mcov, €K twu aAAcov p. 30 

TToAlTtlOiV. 

NE. 20. <\>aiv£Tai tovO" outgo ^VjifiaLvtLV re kcu 
7toli-jtwv ])7T€p Aeyei?. 

5 SE. OvKOVV 8l) KOLi TOV? KOIVCOVOVS TOVTCOV 7U>V 

ttoAitzicov 7raa<jov, ttA^v ttjs e7ncrr?//xoyoy, d({)cup€Teov 
co? ouk bvTas ttoAitlkov 1 ? etAAa aTacriao-TiKOv?, kcu c 
eiScDAcov ueyiaTcov Trpoo-TciTOS ovtols kcu clvtovs elvcu 
TOLOVTOVS, pL€yLO~T0VS be OVTCLS pi/jLr)Tas KOLL yorjTcts 

10 peyiaTovs yiyveaQcu tcov ao(ptaTcou cro(f)io-Ta?. 

NE. 20. KivSvvevei tovto ety rot's" ttoAltlkovs 
Aeyouevovs TrepiecTTpd<f)6ai to prjua bpOoTara. 

HE. Etez/* tovto fJLev are^co? rj/juv cocnrep 8pd.ua, 



I . olov 6ebv e£ dvBpconcov ] 

Compare Aristotle, Pol. III. 8 : 

el 8e tis €<tt\v els too~ovtov 8ia- 
(pepcov Kar dperrjs vnepfHo\r]v — 
axnrep yap 6ebv ev dvdpconois 
elicos elvai rbv tolovtov. 

7. ovk bvTas ttoXitikovs dAAa 
(TTaaiao-TiKOvs] Cf. Legg. 8, 832 
b : ras ou TroXiTCias eya>ye alrias 
eivai (prjpt as TToWaKls e'lprjKa ev 
tols 77poa6ev Xoyois, 8r]poKpaTiav 
Ka\ 6\iyapx.iav Kal TvpavvL8a. tov- 
tcov yap 8rj iroXireia pev ov8epia, 
aratruoTeiai 8e 7rdcrai XeyoiVT civ 
opBorara. 

araaiaa-TiKovs] This is the 
salient point also in the al- 
legory of the ship : Rep. 6, 
488. 

8. eiSwXcoi'] Viz. t£>v ov no- 
XiTeiiov eiceiveav. 

9. toiovtovs ] Sc. ei'SwXa. 

" The very substance of the 
ambitious is but the shadow 
of a dream." Cf. Phsedo 67 b: 

Kadapoi airaWaTTopevoi — peTCi 
tolovtcov — icropeda. 

I I . KtvSvvevei — opBorara] So 



above, 291 c, the same cha- 
racter is described as rbv ndv- 
tcov tcov crocpioTcov peyicrTov yorjTa 
Kal Tavrrjs tt]S rixyr)S epneipoTa- 

tov, in both places with direct 
reference to the argument of 
the Sophist, in which the false 
politician (not 7to\itikos but 
SrjpoXoyiKos) is distinguished 
from the Sophist last of all 
(Soph. sub. fin.). Cf. Gorg. 

465 C : (pvpovrai ev tco avrco Kal 
ivepl Tavra ao(picTTa\ Kal prjTopes. 
lb. 5 21 - 5 a ■ Tavrov J) paKapie, 
earl ao<piCFTr]s Kal prjTcop. 

12. Tvepiea-rpdcpQai probably al- 
ludes to the windings of the 
argument in the Sophist. 
" After so much turning and 
twisting, the word has at last 
fixed itself on them." 

13. tovto pev ex&pio-Qri ] 

rouro has no verb, because the 
end of the sentence is altered 
to agree with the middle : 
thus ixiopiaBrj is substituted 
for enepdvdrj, or some such 
word. The clause Kaddnep — 



nOAITIKOS. Hi? 

303. KaOdirep ipprjdi] vvv 8rj KevravpiKov bpaaOai /cat and 8a- 

^LoLTvpiKov Tiva dlaaov, ov 87] \wpiareov utto ttoXltl- have 

d Krj9 elrj T€)(vr}?, vvv outgo irdvv poyis ix^pLady. onoeforall, 

IN Hi. 2,12. <VatveraL. King. 

£?E. Tovtov Se y erepov e'rt yaXtTroiTtpov Xd- 5 remains an 

Trerai too ^vyyevis re bpov elvai paXXov tco /3ao~t At/co3 s un harder 

yevet /cat bvaKarapaOijTOTepov . /cat pot (fjoavopeOa becauseletsa 

\ \ /I / ' r\ rt e <isy to be 

TOL9 TOV XpVaOV KaOaipOVCTl Trat/09 OpOlOV TTZTTOV- discerned, 

/) f and more 

fovea. ofkinto 
NE. SO. n&s _ -3W 

SE. TtJi/ 7rou /cat XlOov? /cat 7roAA' arra erepa {jJ^'S 

ajroKpLvovat /cat e/cetVot irpbrepov oi Sr/piovpyol' perd j^' *® 

e £e ravra \efarerai ijvppepiypeva ra fjvyyevr) tov if^^, 

Xpvaov rlpia /cat 7n;/)t povov dtycuperd, ^aA/coy /cat j lross > b " fc 
dpyvpos, tan 6" ore /cat dSdpa?, # [a]^ /xera fiacravGov 15 y e * ellini - 

rat? i^rjaecTL pbyis dcpaipeOe'vra tov Xeyopevov precious 

aKrjpaTOv xpvabv elaaev rjpds' iSelv avrov povov i(j) w llich are 

iaVTOV. nation with 

^ x that which 

NE. 20. Aeyerat ya/) ovv Srj ravra ovrco yuy- we seek to 

bring out 

veaOai. 20 clear - 

Arj. J\ara roy avrov roivvv Xoyov eot/ce /cat z/iw ciousand 

,-%><-, v < / , . . / V > kindred 

rjpiv ra pev erepa /cat OTrocra aXXorpia /cat ra prj elements 

0tAa iroXiriKrjs i7rio-rr]pT]? a7roK€)(copio~0ai, XelneaOaL ralsMp, the 

*\ \ 1 v s- - / w y / judicial 

06 ra rtpia /cat fjvyyevi]. tovtojv o eari ttov err pa- function, 



Biaa-ov is suggested by the word move striking image. See this 

Bpapa. described in Faraday's Che- 

6. ra i^vyyeves re opov elvai] mistry of a Candle, pp. 184- 

So Bodl. MS. Vulg. ra gvyyeves 204. 

6' ofMovT. 15. * [a] * ] So Stephanus 

12. ko.1 ene'ipoi] Here also the and Ficinus. MSS. om. 

text follows the Bodleian MS. 17. avrov povov e(j> eavrov] 

13. ra arvyyevrj rod xp v0 ~°v Cf. Slipi*. 268 C : x (0 pi°~ avTes ° 7r ' 
Tt'/Ltm] The fusion of platinum eneivcov Kadapov povov avrov drro- 

would have afforded a still iprjvapev. 



J 68 



flAATONOS 



and that 
nobler rhe- 
toric w hich 

is the ally 
of good 
govern- 
ment. 
\\ e must 
do our best 
to part 

these iitl' 

from the 

supreme 
science. 
Take music 
and the 
mechanical 
arts. There 
can be no 
doubt that 
they must 
yield prece- 
dence to the 
art which 
determines 
which of 
them is to 
be learnt. 



Trjyla koll SiKaariKy kcil oai] (3aai\LKfj koivcovovctoc p. 3c | 
pi-jTopeia ireiOovaa to Slkoliov £vv&La.Kvfi€pva ret? ev 
tous 7t6\€(tl irpa^eis' a 8i) * ' rivi* Tporrcp paara ti? 
diropLtpifav Seltjei yvfxvov kou /jlovov Ikiivov ko.0' 
5 avrov tov ^qTovfxevov v(\j -t]pu>v ; 

NE. 20. Ar/Aov otl tovto tttj Spav TreLpareov. 
SE. Tlelpas pL€v Toivvv eve/to. (fjavepos earat' 81a 

$€ pLOVaiKtjs OLVTOV ey\€lpT]T€OV SfjXcQOrai. KOLl fJLOL 

Xeye. 
10 NE. 20. To ttoIov ; 

SE. Mou<tikt]9 eart ttov ti? rjfjuu pLaOrjat?, kou b 
oAcoy T(i>v we pi xeipore^las €7rio-Tr)pLa>i> ; 

NE. 20. "Earn,. 

S*E. TV 6Y; to <5' av tovtcdv -qvTivovv e'/re del 



I . Ka\ oar) — 7rpdtjets] Such 
a higher rhetoric is hinted at 
in the Phsedrus and Gorgias, 
but more ironically than here. 
Cf. Gorg. 480 c, e ; Phsedr. 
271 d, e. The word pijro- 
pela is peculiar to this place. 
Perhaps, as Stallbaum thinks, 
it conveys a nobler idea than 
prjTopiKTj. The admission of 
rhetoric into the state is a 
return to nature similar to 
the adoption of paid teachers 
which accompanies it in the 
Laws. Cf. Legg. 4, 7 1 1 d, e : r) 

ttjv Nearopos — (pvatv, ov rrj tov 
Xeyeiv pcoprj (petal it&vtcop htevey- 
Kovra dvdpaircav nXeov %ri t<5 
acocppovelv hta(pe'petv k.t.A. The 
npootpta or vovdeTTjTiKcii Xoyot of 
that dialogue are an example 
of the kind of rhetoric here 
meant. Compare also the re- 
admission of the practical sci- 
ences in the Philebus. 

3. *7"iVt* Tponcp paaraj I have 



ventured to accent r'm and to 
add the mark of interrogation, 
as the superlative seems to be 
otherwise without meaning ; 
and the answer of Young 
Socrates is at least equally 
apposite when the words are 
thus taken. Cf. Soph. 241 e ; 
Legg. 6, 779 e • h v $h Tiva T p6- 

ttqv \pr] £ijv vvp(ptov Kal vvp(prjv ; 

A similar change has still to be 
made in the text of Phileb. 26 
e : TeTaprov ri Tore e(papev eivat 
yevos aKeTTTeov : ubi legend, re- 
Taprov t'i rare. See Mr. Poste's 
translation. 

14. Tt he ; to h' av] Ast's 

conj., tL he Toh' av ; has been 
adopted by the Zurich editors. 

TOVTGtV TjVTIVOVV K.T.X.] This 

thought was afterwards deve- 
loped into the apx n " eKT0 " lK '? of 
Aristotle. See esp. Eth. Nic. 
I. 2. Pol. VII. 3. Compare 
Plat. Euthyd. 289, 290 ; Cra- 
tyl. 390 a. Gorg. 517 c Legg. 



nOAITIKOS. 



169 



I504. fiavOdveiv rj/j.a.9 elre 107, worepa (jjrjcro/jLev eirurrrjfjLrjv 
av kcu Tavrrjv elvai riva irep\ aura ravra, ?/ 7rco? ; 
NE. 20. Our coy, eJvai (j)i](JOfxev. 
SE. Ovkovv eWepav ofioXoyrjcrofiev eKelvcov eivai 
Tavrrjv ; 

NE.*2Q. Na/. 

HE. Ylorepa 8' avrcov ovSepclav ap^eiv Sew aXXr/v 
c aXXr)?, rj iiceivas ravrr)?, rj Tavrrjv 8elv eirirpoirevov- 
aav apyeiv ^vjiTraawv rcov aXXoov ; 

NE. 20. Tavrrjv eKelvcov. 

HE. [Tr)v\ el 8el jiavOdveiv rj /xt) rrj? fiavOavo- 
jievrjs kcu SidcKTKOvar)? apa av y dirofyaivei 8eiv 
rjjiiv apyeiv ; 

NE. SO. 20o6> ye. 

aE. Kca rr;t* el Set weldeiv apa rj fxrj rrjs 8vva- 
jievrjs ireldeiv ; 

NE. 20. Ilcor t? ov; 

HE. Etez/" rm ro ireiariKov ovv diro8coaojj.ev eiri- 
d arrjjxrj 7rXr)6ovs re Kal o^Xov 81a /ivOoXoyla? dXXa 
jxrj &a oi8a)(r}$ ; 

NE. 20. Oaz/e^ooi/, olfxai, Ka\ rovro prjropiKfj 80- 
reov ov. 

HE. To 5' are &a ireiOovs eire Kal 8lol tivos fiias 



So of the 
art of per- 
suasion. 

'I'lii i urn t 
yield to 
the art 
which de- 
cides whe- 

5 ther per- 
suasion or 
force is to 
lie used : 
i. e. the art 
of states- 
manship. 
Tli en gene- 
ralship du- 

I0 cides how 
war is to 
be conduct- 
ed : hut the 
prior ques- 
tion of war 
or peace 
must be 
decided by 
another 

j - and more 
authorita- 
tive art, 
which can 
be nothing 
less than 
royal. 



12, 963 : vovv yap 8i) Kvfiepvrj- 
tikov pev Kcii larptKov e'liropev — 
top 8e ttoXitlkov iXeyxpvres h>- 
ravd' ea-fiev vvv. 

1 1. [T^i/] et Set pavBavew r) prj\ 

The old editors, supported by 
few MSS., insert ttjv before el, 
which Stallbaum has retained. 
The Zurich editors read Tavrrjv 

eKelvcov, el del pavddveiv rj prj. 

3. rrjs p. k.t.X. But the tenor 



of the argument makes the 
retention of ttjv almost impe- 
rative. Compare similar spe- 
cimens of analogical reasoning 
in the Gorgias. 

18. TTeiaTiKov] This word is 
used again in Legg. 4, 723 a. 

20. pi) 81a 8i8axrj<:] Cf. Gorg. 

445 a ; Theset. 201 a, b. Com- 
pare the opposition of pvdos 
and Xo'yos in Gorg. 523 a. 



170 I1AATON02 

Set TTpa.TT€iv irpos Tiva? otlovv r) koli to irapuirav p. y 
j[€)(€wf, tovt av Troia 7rpoa0i]aofxev imcrTrjpir) ; 

NE. 20. Tfj r;;y 7T€i(JTiKr)9 dpyovorr) koli Xektikt}?. 

HE. En; 8e av ovk aXXrj r*?, coy oifiai, irX-qv rj 

5 T0V 7ToXtTlKOV Svvafll?. 

NE. 20. KaAAicrr' e'lpr/Ka?. 

HE. Kat roi}7-o /xe> eWe ra^i; K^wpiaOai ttoXl- 

TLKYjS TO prjTOpiKOV, &>? €T€pOV el8o? 0V, V7TT]p€T0Vl> 

yu^ TavTy. 
io NE. 20. Na/. 

HE. T7 <5e 7re/0i r^? tolocctS' av Swa/ieco? 8iavo- 
ryriov ; 

NE. 20. Woias ; 

HE. T77? coy TroXepcqTeov i/cdo-Toi? oW av npo- 
15 tXwfxeOa TroXejieiVy e'/re avTrjv areyyov eiTt evTeyvov 
epovfiev ; 

NE. 20. Kai 7rco? az> areyyov diavorjOelpLev, rjv ye 
rj cTTpaT-qyLKr) /cat iraaa rj 7roXepLLKr) irpa^is irpaTTti ; 
HE. T^f 5' e'/re 7roX€fir)Teov e'/re &a (piXias 
20 ajraXXaKTeov otav re /cat hricrTriixova SiafiovXev- 



1. ij «at to irapaTrav fe'xeivf] qualifying an assertion supr. 

Schleiermacher conjectured iav 263 e : ayikaiav prjv £acov. So 

(cf. Soph. 242 a: ro Trapanav ia- pevroi in Rep. 1,334 b: eV 

rkov. And e'av may perhaps have aXpeXelq p.evroi tcov (pikcov k.t.\. 

been mistaken for a contraction 1 4. a>s] How, in what way. 
of e'xeiv) ; Stallbaum an£x. elv = to 15. eiVe] Interrogative, de- 
refrain — supposing an to be pending on 8iavor]Teov. 
absorbed in Tvapairav. (d7re'x«i> 17. 17V -ye] " "Why it is the 
sc. tov TrpaTTtiv.') Herm. conj. function on which generalship 
y\o-y)\ia.v e%eiv. Badh. \eyew, and all warlike action is em- 
with a view to XeKTiKrjs infra. ployed." Cf. Protag. 322 b : 

But XeKTiKrjS is only an ex- ttoXitiktjv rjs pepos 7ro\epiKfj. 

pansion of ireio~TiKrjs. The 19. Tfjv 8 fire 7T.] Bodl. ttjv 

conjecture of Hermann is the Se w. with All. 

best. 20. o'Lav re koi eVto-rij/xoj'a] 

9. p.r)v] (irjv is thus used in "Able through knowledge." 



nOAITIKOS. 



171 



1304. aaaOat, Tavrr)? erepav vnoAdficofiev 7) ti)v uvtijv 
ravrrj ; 

NE. 20. Tol? rrpoaOeu dvayKaiov eirofxevoLcriv 
erepav. 
305. 3?E« Ovkovv apyovcrav tclvtt)? avrrjv dirotyavov- [ 
/jteOa, elirep tols epurpoaOev ye v7ro\rj\l/6/xe$a o/xojW ; 

NE. 20. 0»7/x/. 

£?E. TiV ow 7TOT6 /ecu iTTixeLprjaopLev ovtco Seivrj? 
kou fxeyaAr]? re\vr)9 ^vpcKacnyi r^y 7ro\ep.iK.r)s Se- 
cnroTiv dmo§aivecr6ai 7rXi]v ye 8rj rrjv ovtcos ovcrav 
(3acri\LKi]v ; 

NE. 20. Ovde/xlav dkX^v. 

HE. Ovk apa iroXiTiK-qv ye Orjaofiev, vTrrjpeTLKr^v 
ovcrav, rrjv tcov arpar-qycov hrio~Tr]p.r]v. 

NE. 20. Ovk gIkos. 
b S?E. "I#i £77, /cat r?)i> 70)2/ 8iKao-T(ov tcov opOcos 
8iKa(pvTcov Oeacrco/ieda 8vvap.Lv. 

NE. 20. ria^i; /xeV ovv. 

HE. 5 A/)' o?jj> eVi irXeov ri hvvarai rod 7rep\ rd 



The gene- 
ral, then, is 
a servant, 
and not a 
5 governor. 
Let us now 
examine 
the judicial 
faculty. 
What can 
this do be- 
yond the 
impartial 



8. ovtco — -7ro\eij.tKr]s~\ " What 
science shall we go about to 
make supreme over the whole 
of strategy, a power so for- 
midable and so mighty?" 

IO. tt]v ovtcos ovcrav /3ao"tX»C7ji/] 
So the argument is strength- 
ened by an appeal to language 
in Soph. 2 2IC: f/ iravrdnaaiv 
cos dXrjdcbs cro(pto-TrjV. Supi*. 260 
C : 8ecm6£ovTa ye. 

13. VTrr)periKT)v ov<rav~\ Viz. 
Subservient to the end of po- 
litics. So iirrjpeTiv eKeivrjs infr. C. 
Cf. supr. 260. 

1 6. "181 — Kai] Cf. supr. 267a: 
(pepe — ml o-vveipcop.ev. 

ig.'Ap'ovv — diaipelv;] "Can 



the judicial art do anything 
more than, on questions of 
contract, to determine what is 
legally just and unjust by re- 
ference to those fixed laws 
which she receives from the 
lawgiving king ; while she 
brings to the performance of 
this office her own peculiar 
virtue, that of being incapable 
of yielding to bribes or intimi- 
dation or the appeal to pity, 
or to any other feeling, whe- 
ther of enmity or favor, so as 
to be willing to determine 
suits between parties other- 
wise than as the lawgiver has 
appointed V 



Z 2, 



172 IIAATONOI 

and incor- £v/i(3oXaia, irdvO^ oiroaa Keirat vop.ip.a irapd vop.o- |>. 3c 
administpa- Oerov fiaaiXea)? TrapaXafiovaa, Kpiveiv ei? eKelva 

tion of ex- m , 9 v v 

LBtinglawB? (JKGiTOvcra r« re olkoliol Taypevra eivai koli aoiKa, 
TT\v avTrjs iSiav dperi-jv 7ra.peypp.evr1 tov p.i]6 vtto 

hTLVO)V SwpWV pLl]0 y VTTO (f)6/3cDl> fJLTJT€ OLKTCOV pL7]6* 

vtto TLV09 aAXrj? e^6pa9 ptr]8e (f)iXlas -qTrrjOelaa uapa c 
tt)V tov vop.o6erov rd^iv edeXeiv av to. dXXrjXcov 
iy/cXr/pcara Siaipelv ; 

NE. 20. Ovk, dXXa crxeSou ocrov e'tprjKas, returns* 
ioeoTt 7-779 SvvdpLeco? epyov. 

Thisppwer, £E. }^ a \ T ^ v T £ v SlKa(TTG)l> apa pU>pLT/l> dvevp'i- 

only the aKopLev ov fiao-iXiKrjv ovcrav dXXa vop.coi> (hvXaKa koll 

guardian, f ' 

and not the VTTrjpeTLV eKeiVT]^. 

directress, 

of the laws. NE. 20. ' Eoi/C6 ye. 

The science f , , , f f , y 

of govern- 15 ^E. Tooe o?; KaravorjTeov loovtl avvairaaa? TOL? 

nient must , , ^ if rf , » ~ > ^ ^ 

he different eiTl(TTr)p.aS CLl eipqVTOLl, OTl TToXlTLKT) ye aVTCOV OVOepUd 
from all of , , , \ x v ■$ n , \ > » \ , 

these. Her avecpavq. tt)v yap ovTws ovaav pacrcXiKr]u OVK aVTTjV d 

business is^« / > . , » v ~ c» t ' 

notimme- oet Trparreiu, aXX apyeiv T(£>v ovvapLevcov irpaTTeiv, 

diate ac- / \ > r \ t \ ~ / 

tion, but yiyvuto-Kovo-av tyjv apyrjv re /cat op\xr\v tcdv pLeyLcrrcov 

the guid- > ~ / .. 1 / / v > / \ 

ance of 20 w T a ^ 7ToA€0~iv eynaipias re irepi Kai aKaipias, ras 

action w " \ \ % /\ ' s> " 

through ° aAAa? ra Trpoo~TayUevTa bpav. 

'Zfr NE. 20. "OpM,. 

5. p^d' u7ro' rtvos aXX^? ey#p.] " Understanding, as regards 

" No, nor yet hatred ;" accord- fitness and unfitness of times, 

ing to the well-known Platonic the beginning and first im- 

idiom. Cf. supr. 298 d : are pulse of what is most im- 

tlvcov larpcop Kai Kvf5epvr)T<i>v e'ir portant in states." Cf. Rep. 

aXXcov Idicorwv. 4, 424 a : jroXtreia iav airag 

9. <rxe86v — epyoi/] " You 6pp,rjarj fv. 

have fairly expressed the limits 20. ras 8' oAXas] Supr. 

within which this power is ex- 277 d: to'is S' «XXots Sia x ei P- 

ercised." ovpyicov. So, very frequently, 

17. ovk airfjv Set npciTTeiv, aXX' the obverse of a proposition 

apxeiv] Cf. supr. 259 c. is stated at the close of a 

19. yiyvacrKovcrav — TroXe'criv] sentence. 



nOAITIKOS. 173 

505. 3*E. Aia ravra apa, «? p.ev apri 8LeXiiXv0apev, 



tccanons, 
md of the 



ovre dXXrjXcov ovQ' avrcov apyovaai, irepi 8e riva Brat begin 

,*/ r- T ,/ „ y nn,(j,/ ninga of 

Loiav avTrjs ovaa eKacrrr) irpatjiv, Kara tijv LOtuTrjra great 

TCOV 7rpdfJ6(OV TOVVOpa 8lKaiG)S e'lXrjtyeV l8lOV. The rest 

NE. 20. E'/fao-J yovv. 5 aparfcicnlar 

>— <TT' Ti^ ^ « / v \ function 

Aili. 1^ oe iraawv re tovtcov ap^ovtrav kcci tcov and name: 

t \o/ ^ \ 1 . , . / the work- 

vopcov kgll ^vparavTcov tcov Kara ttoAlv e7r1p.eA0vp.e1/rju - mg f 

v' h jl 1 »/i' " " " Btatesman- 

kcci TravTCL £vvv(paivovo-av opooTara, rov kolvov ry Bhipisuni- 

■> ' \ rt ' v ^ ' • " versa] : ;unl 

KArjo-eL irepiAapovTes rrju ovvap.Lv avTiqs, irpoaayo- hence thia 
pevoipev diKaioTCLT av, &>? eoiKe, ttoXltiktjv. 10 sc " 

NE. 20. YlavTouracri pev ovv. 

SE. OltcoOj> 5?) /cat /cara to rrjs ixfiavTiKrjs irapa- 
Secypa /3ouAo//xec9' av eire^eXOelv avTr)v vvv, ore koll 



bears the 
general 
name of 
govern- 



Having 
now distin- 

udvTCL rd yevt] rd Kara ttoXlv 8r)Xa rjplv yeyovev ; ft Ulshe ti ** 

forms of 



NE. 20. Kgu a(j)68pa ye. 



let us view 



StE. Trjv 8r) fiatriAiK-qv avpurXoK-qv, cos eoiKe, 
<jo6. XeKTeov iroia r earl koll tto'lco toottco avuirXeKOvaa h Y the 

e * * light of our 

7T0?0^ T^U^ V(f)acrp.a aTTo8i8cOCTlV. example. 

NE. 20. AijXoV. the nature 

„ of the web 

SE. 'H xaXeirbv ev8elPaa0aL tt pay p.a dvayKahv^m which 

v , » j / tms sove " 

apa yeyovev, cos (paLverai. reign art 

v ,— . r - r / \ f / inweaves 

NE. 20. WavTcos ye p.r)v prjreov. all other 



SE. To yap aperrjs pepos aperr}? e'l8eL 8id(f)opov 



8. ^vvv(palvovo-av\ This word liriuikovuevr)v airdvTuiv tcov Kara 

prepares the way for the return tt6\iv. For 7reptXa/3. cf. Theret. 

to the example of weaving in 148 d : ravrns iro\\as ovo-as evi 

what follows. ei'oVi mpieXa^es. 

rov kolvov rfj Kkrjaei irepi- 1 3. civttjv] avrrj Bodl. All : 

Xa/3oirf? ttjv hivafiiv avrrjs ] Cett. avrrjv. Cf. Legg. 6, 77^ C, 

" Characterizing the function Phileb. 66 d. 

of this art by the name of that ore — yeyove] Pp. 2 S 7-2 90, 

which it shares with the rest," 303-305. 

viz. that they are for the good 23. To yap — 8o'£as] " That 

of the state. Sc. tto\ltik7)v, are one part of virtue is in some 



arts '' 



174 nAATONOS: 

The .in- di/ai riva Tpoirov toi? wept Xoyovs dp.(l)icr(3r)Ti]TiKols p. 30 ;: 

involvesa koll ixaX eu€7rl0erop 7rpb? rds twv noXXcou 86£as. 

difficult iv 

question. NE. 20. Ol)/C k'paOov. 

The parts M , , T , t f \ t t 

of virtue aE. AAA woe ira\w. avftpeiav yap olp.ai (7€ 

are gene- , „ , ,\ , , „ ? 

rallj sup- 5 yyeiauai pepos ev aperr)? r)plv elvai. h 

posed to l>c 
in unison. 
We must 
now ex- 
amine whe- 
ther cou- 



NE. 20. IlaW ye. 

HE. Kal p.r)v (Tco(f)poavvrju ye dvSpelas p.ei> erepov, 

€P $ OVV KOI TOVTO pLOpiOV Tj? KOLKeivO. 

J3J? NE. 20. N«/. 

ance are >— IT7 , rr\ ' S> v/ /i ' % ' » 

not rather ro Ati. 1 OVTCOV 07] TTtpL VOLV{ia(TTOl> TIVOL KoyOV UTTO- 

opposed. I / /i % / 

(paiveaUai roXp.7]reov. 

NE. 20. notoi/ ; 

£7E. '12? i<TTbv Kara 8r) riva Tpoirov ev p.aXa 
7rpos- dXXirjXas * ^Opoc * Kal ardatv ivavrlav eyovre 
15 eV 7roAAoi9 rc3y ovtcov. 

NE. 20. n^y Aeyew ; 

SE. Ot)/c elcoOora Xoyov ov8ap.a>?' iravra yap 



way different from another 8. ^s Kd»«<WJ Sc. aper^s. 

kind of virtue is a position 14. a-rdaiv ivavriav] "Anop- 

easily assailable by contentious posed attitude :" or perhaps, 

disputants who appeal to com- crraa-iv evavriav e'xovre, " holding 

mon opinion." opposite sides." For ey#pa the 

(23.) operas fiepos dperrjs etSet] MSS. and Edd. have eytfpai/ : 

The expression is purposely e'xovre C. H. : cett. ex eTOV - Cf. 

varied, perhaps with the inten- Phaxlr. 238 a : bvo rive earov 

tion of recalling the still Ull- I8ea apxovre Ka\ Syopre. 

settled question of the distinc- 15. iv noXXo7s t£>v ovtcov] Cf. 

tion between el8os and p-epos, illfr. C : e'lTe Kara (Toopara eire iv 

SUpr. 263 a. Cf. Legg. 7,791 ^t^ats eire Kara (pcovrjs (popav, 

C, where dvSpeia is called ^vx>js ew' avrwv tovtodv eiV iv elboAois 

popiov dpeTrjs. lb. 3, 689 d : OVTCOV. 

Charm. 1 60 a. The words from 1 7. iravra yap ovv — cpi\ia] The 

rj YaAe7rw to 86gas are given to present is certainly a modifi- 

the same speaker in the Bodl. cation of the view taken by 

MS. Socrates in the Protagoras, 

4. 'AAA' o>Se ttoIlv] Cf.Theset. where he upholds the simple 

191b: aX\' a>8e. Rep. i. 352 e. unity of virtue. 
Soph. 262 e : m^ 0-p.iKpbv rode. 



flOAITIKOS. 



175 



i |»o6. ovv <5?7 dXXr']Aoi? rd ye tyjs dperr/s fiopia Xeyerai 
c 7rov (filXia. 

NE. 2Q. Nat. 

3?E. ^Koircopev 81) 7rpoaypvTe9 tov vovv ev pdXa, 
ivorepov ovtcos dirXovv earl tovto, ?) iravros pLuXXov ■ 
clvtcov e\ei Siacpopdv rols ijvyyeveaiv es ti ; 

NE. SO. Nat, Xeyots dv tttj aKeirreov. 

HE. 'E*> roi9 ^vpuraciL yjpr) (jjTeiv oaa KaXd ptev 
Xeyopev, els Svo 5' avrd riQep.ev evavria dXXijXcav 
e'lSr}. 

NE. 20. Ae'y en. cracpearepov. 

HE. 'OtjvTTjTa kcll rd)(OS, etre Kara acopara eire 

d ev >\/vyai$ evre Kara (pcovrjs (popdv, eire avnov tovtcov 

e\r ev eldcoXois ovtcdv, biroaa plovctlkt] pupovpevr) kcll 

en ypa(f)iKr) pipjjpLara wape^erat, tovtcov tlvos enrai- 



We mu t 
loot E01 tin 
amongst 
ad ions 
which we 
admire, and 
at the same 
time con- 
trast with 
each other. 
We praise 
quickness 
and bold- 
ness on 
many occa- 
sions, and 
always by 
, applying 
the same 
epithet of 
' brave.' 



5. ovtcos anXovp] Cf. Symp. 
183 d : ovx an'hovv ecrrtv, — ovre 
aaXov eivai qvto — ovre alcrxpov, 
dWa Kcikcos fiev TrparTOfxevop KaXov, 
alcrxpu>s 8e alcrxpov. 

rj — ™] "Or whether there 
be of them which differ in some 
respect from their congeners." 
The old editions had e'xov — earl, 
which however is only found 
in the margin of Ven. H, and 
is probably due to iariv having 
been read for is t\. Heindorf 
COllj. e'xov e<TTL ti. But for av- 
tqov without ti, cf. supr. 285 e, 
and two. or arret is required 
rather than n. 

8. ocra — avTa] Cf. Soph. 
225b: ocroi/ — a/x0icr/3r/reirai p.ev, 
elufj 8e — 7Tfpt auTO 7rpdrrerat. 

12. 'Oi-VTrjTa — j]0~dr]0~ai f] "I 

mean to ask, have you ever 
praised or heard others praise 



any such thing as quickness and 
speed, etc. 1" The constraction 
is changed as the sentence pro- 
ceeds, the accusative in d£. 
Kai Tax- being partly due to 
Xeye, and twos to the pi-evious 
genitives. 

ei're — ijcrdijcrai ] The first 
two pairs of eire s are hy- 
pothetical, and the third is 
interrogative. " Whether you 
have either yourself spoken 
or heard others speak in com- 
mendation of any of these 
things — quickness and speed, 
whether in body, or mind, or 
movement of sound, whether 
real, or in such shadowy forms 
as music, and even painting, 
afford by imitation." 

ei're ev v/z^ais] Cf. Lcgg. 
3, 689 d : TvavTa tc\ Kop-fya nai 
Tvpbs tuxos ttjs yj/vx^s 7re0UKoVa. 



176 nAAT0NQ2 






veTrjs etre aura? ttcottote yeyovus cure dXXov rrapow p. 3' 
i.iratvovvro's no'OrjO'ai ; 

NE. 20. Tt fjL7 F ; 

SE. 'H /cat fjLi>r)fir]i> e^ty OVTiva Tpoirov avro 

5 SpcoCTLJ/ Iv €K<X(JT019 TOUTCOf ; 

NE. 20. OuSa/zeSy. 

SE. 'A/o' ow 8vvarbs avro av yevoifirjv, (ocnrtp 
/cat 8ia.voovp.ai, 81a Xoycov ivdelijao-Oal aoi ; 

NE. 20. Tt <$' ov; e 

10 SE. 'Pa<5to^ eot,K.as riyeiadai to tolovtov' o-kottw- 
p.eda 8* out> auro eV rot? virevavTLOLS yeveari. tcov yap 
8i] irpd^eu>v iv woXXals /cat ttoXXclkis eKacrroTe ra^os 
Kal o-<po8poTr}Ta koi o^vttjto. 8iavor)aem re /cat cnop.a- 
T09, €TL 8e Kal (f)coi>r]9, orav dyao-0a>p.ev, Xeyop.ev avro 
ibtiraivovvTts pud xpcop.evoi irpocrprjaeL rfj rrjs avBpeias. 
NE. 20. Urn ; 

37E. 'Oijv /cat dv8pel6v ttov (f)ap.ev, Kal ra^v /cat 
di>8piKov, /cat a(po8pbv waavrcos' /cat iravrcos im(J)6- 
povres rovvopca b Xeya> koivov irdo-ais tols (pvaeat 
20 ramais £iraivovp.€v avrds. 



4. avro bpaxrC] Cf. Soph. ra>v yap 8tj — dvbpeias] "For 
233 c: ApSo-t Se ye toOto npbs there are many actions in which, 
ajravrd, cpapfu. and that repeatedly, we praise 

5. eV sicdo-Tois tovtcov] " In speed and vehemence and quick - 
the case of body, mind, voice, ness, mental and bodily; and 
or imitative art." on each occasion" (erao-Tore) 

7. wcnrep — 8iavoovp.at] Cf. "express our praise of the qua- 

Crat. 435 b. lity which we admire by the 

11. iv tols v-rrevavriois yeVecn] one appellation of ' bravery.' " 

" In the kinds where the oppo- 12. iv iroXXal? na\ ttoXXokis ] 

sition appears." Supr. c : ivavria Cf. Soph. 264 b: evia ko.\ more — 

— ei'877. Qy. Tais uTrerarriais with which should bave been 

yece'o-eo-i ? Cf. infr. : rjpepalas av compared Phileb. 32 d : ivlore 

yeviarecos. 3IO 0.'. TroWals yeve- Ka\ evia — eo~riv ore . 

o-eo-iv, where some MSS. have 14. avro] Sc. rdxos ko.\ o-cpo- 

noWols yeveatv. dpoTrjra Ka\ o^vTrjTa k.t.X. 



nOAITIKOS. 



177 



,06. NE. 20. Nat. 

JE?E. Tt (V; 70 rrjs r)pep.alas av yeueaeoj? elftos dp 
[07. ov 7roAAa/cfy eirrjveKap.ev ev TroAAaty twv 7rpd$jecov ; 

NE. 20. Rat cr0do>a ye. 

HE. Mc3y oui/ ou rdvavTia Xeyovre? ?) 7re/9t €/ce/- 
yaw rouro (f)0eyyopLe6a ; 

NE. 20. ricSy ; 

HE. '0? rjavxaid ttov (fiapLev eKaarore kou a<o- 
(j)povLKci, irepi re Sidvotav irpaTTopieva dyaaOevTes 
kcu Kara rd? irpd^ets av (SpaSea /cat /uaAa/ca, /cat en 
irepi (f)coi>d? yiyvop.eva Aeta kou jQapea, kou irdaav 
pvOfiiKrjv Kivrjaiv kou oXyjv povaav ev Koupcp (3paSv- 
h rrJTi 7rpocr)(pa>p,ei>i]v i ov to ttjs dvftpeias aAAa to Trjs 
KOO-fJuoTijTo? ovopta eiTL^epopiev oivtoIs ^vpuraGLV. 

NE. 20. 'AAT/foarara. 

HE. Kat fir)i> birorav av ye dpttpoTepa ylyvrjTai 
ravTa i)puv aKaipa, peTafiaXXovTes eKarepa avrwv \j/e- 
yop.ev eVt TavavTia irdXiv dirovepiQVTes toIs bvopuacriv. 



Again, 
wc often 
praise x<-i\~ 
tlenesa and 
q detail 
of di mean 
our and 
movement , 
and here 
wc use the 
very dif- 
ferent epi- 
thet of 

' modest.' 
On the 
other hand, 

both bold- 
nesa and 
gentleness 
are often 
blamed, as 
rash and 
cowardly. 
But rash- 
ness and 

. cowardice 
are not 
found toge- 
ther, and 
bravery 
and mo- 
desty have 
not a natu- 



2. yevecreoos] The word is 
used in the same sense as supr. 
283 d, 287 e, to express the 
operation of any art, or, more 
generally, the act of doing any- 
thing. 

8. c Oy rjcrvxala — £vfjLTra<riv ] 

" In saying ' quiet and mode- 
rate' on each occasion, as you 
know we do (7tou), when we 
admire what is done slowly 
and softly either in thought 
or action, or, again, what is 
sounded smoothly and gravely, 
and all rhythmical movement, 
and every liberal exercise 
which applies slowness at the 
proper time. To all these we 
attribute not bravery but so- 
briety, as a fitting epithet." For 



7r£s; answered by w, cf. Rep. 
6, 510b; irfj 5 — J/ to peu avToii 
k.tX Theak 172 d. For the 
asyndeton, cf. supr. 293 b, 
where vevop.iKap.ev is resumed 
in (papev, as qbapev in irrt(pe- 

pofiev here. 

12. povo~av~\ Cf. Legg. 4, 
722 d. 

ev Kaipcf] Cf. illfr. e, dicac- 

pOTCpOV OVTCL T) )(pi], and AllSt. 

Eth. Nic. II. 2, Set 8' avrovs 

del TOVS TTpClTTOVTClS TO. TTpuS TOV 

Kaipbv (TKoneiv. 

17. aKaipa] This reading is 
found as a correction in E, 
otherwise the MSS. unite in 

giving aKepata. 

18. €ttl TavavTia ndXiv anove- 
povres rots ov6p.aaiv\ " Assigning 

A a 



178 



flAATONOS 



rnJ affinity 
For each 

Doth these 
diverse na- 
tures aud 
the indivi- 
duals in 
whom they 
are found, 
most often 
Btand op- 
])osed and 
are divided 
by mutual 
antipathy. 
This play 
of antipa- 
thies is, 
however, 
a trifle in 
comparison 
of the mo- 
mentous 
issues to 



NE. 213. llm ; 

SE. 'O^urepa ucv aura, yiyvoatva tou Kcupov kcu 
Oclttcd kcu aKk-qporepa (jyatvoueva [/cat] vfipurTiKa kcu 
uaviKa Aeyovres, to. 8e (3pa8vrepa koll uaXrxKcorepa 
5 SeiAa kcu /3Aa/a/ca'. kcu oyebov w? to ttoXu tolvtol 
re kcu rrjv acoc^pova cfyvcriv kcu rrjv avhpiiav ttju tcoi/ 
IvavTLoav, oiov ']"7roAe^/ay-j" SiaXaypvaas araatu iSear, 
out ciAArjAcu? uiyvvuivas i(f)eupLO~Kou€i> eV rat? irepl 
ra TOiavra 7rpdtjecTiv, en re rov? iv rah y^/v^cus 
loavTas l(j)(0VTas dLCKpepouevovs aAA^Aot? 6\j/6u€0a, 
iau ueradicoKcouev. 

NE. 20. Uod St) Aeyw ; 

HE. 'Ey iracri re 8rj tovtois oh vvv ehrofiev, cos 



P-3 



them to the opposite quarters 
again in our nomenclature." 

3. [ko.\] vj3picTTiKa\ So all the 
MSS. except Ven. S. ml v(3p. 
kcu fiav. = " Not only violent, 
but mad." 

vfipio-TiKa] Cf. Pheedr. 252 b: 

vfBpKTTlKOV TTU.VV KOI OV 0~(ji68pa 

ti epperpov. Cratyl. 426 b. 

4. paviKa] Cf. Soph. 242 a: 

pi] TTore aoL pai'iKus eivai 86£a> 
napci 7768a peTa(3aXo>v ipavrbv uva) 
Kal Kara). 

5. (BXaKiKa] Cf. Eep. 4, 432 d : 
(BXcikikov ye fjpav to irdBos. Gorg. 
488 a : irdvv pe rjyuv /3X5ko effect. 

Euthyd. 287 e : i^paprov 8u\ 

rr)v fikaneiav, 

kcu cr^eSof peTahi&>Ka>pev ] 

" And so it is for the most part 
that we find these (the harsh 
and effeminate), and also the 
temperance and manliness of 
the characters opposed to them, 
as ideas diametrically antago- 
nistic, not mingling with each 
other in the actions concerncd 



Avith such things ; and, more- 
over, we find, if Ave folloAv up 
the quest so far, that the men 
also of whose minds they are 
attributes are at variance Avith 
each other." dv8peiav is pro- 
bably a substantive. 

7. olov — Ideas] The Avords as 
they stand must be construed 
" As hostile forms having taken 
different sides in a quarrel." 
(SmX. or.) But I Avould venture 
to read iroXeuacu', and translate 
" Forms Avhich as it were have 
severally been put in a hostile 
attitude." Compare o-rdaiv 

evavTiav eyoire SUpr. 306 b. 

Alberti's interpretation, Avho 
AVOllld join ttjv tu>v ivavriav 
8iaX.axovo-as ardo-iv, oiov %o\e- 

pias I8eas, - " participating, as 
hostile forms, in the Avar of 
opposites," Avill hardly com- 
mend itself to scholars. He 
is right, however, in adducing 
Legg. 8, 836 d : to ttjs aaxppo- 
vos ISeas yivos. 



nOAITIKOS. 



179 



\oj. cIko? re, Iv €T6poL9 noXXois. Kara yap ol/j.ai Ti]V 

d avrcois eKarepois j-vyyivtiav rd /xeV tiraivovvrzs co? 

oiKeia a(j)€Tepa, rd Se twv $ia(f)6p(av xj/f-yovres coy 

dXXorpia, 7roX\rji> ei? tyOpav dXXr/Xois koll ttoXXwv 

7T€pL KaO'tdTavTai. 5 

NE. 20. Ku/Svvevovcriv. 

£?E. Ilac8ia Toivvv avrr) ye' tls rj 8ia(f)opa tovtcdv 
iarl twv eldcow 7rep\ de rd p,ey terra vocros ^vpifiaiveL 
Tracrwv kyOiaTr) yiyveaOai reus TroXeaiv. 

NE. 20. He pi Si) ttolol (j)rj$ ; i° 

e HE. rie/n oXi]P, cos ye ekoy, rr)V rov £r}v irapa- 
aKevrjv. ol p.lv yap di) $ia(f)€p6i>TQi? ovres Kocrp-ioi rov 
rj<jv)(oi> del fiiov eroipoi (r)v, avrol Ka0* avrov? povoi 
ra a(f)erep' avrcov 7rpa.TT0i>T€?, olkol re wpbs awavras 
ovtcos bpiXovvres, /ecu irpbs rd$ e'ijcoOev 7roX€is oocrav- 15 



which this 
contrarii ty 
leads. 

For tho 
lovers of a 
quiet life, 
if they have 
their way, 
by enerva- 
ting them- 
selves and 
tlic youth, 
will often 
bring theii 
country 
into sla- 
very. 



2. cos oiKe'ia a<perepa^ " As 
their own kith and kin." Stall- 
baum quotes Demosth. Orat. c. 
Callic. pp. 1274. 5, 1275. 7 : 
fifierepov 'Idiov. Lucian. T. III. 
p. 226 e, ed. Bipont. : rovpov 
i'Stoi/. The Bodleian has icpirepa 
( sic )- 

4. troWr/v — Ka\ noWcov 7re'pi] 
Cf. ev ttoXXoij Kai 7ro\\dKts SUpr. 

306 e. 

7. naiSm] I. e. a trifling 
matter. Cf. iEsch. Prom. 314. 

ye rts] Qy. y 'in 1 

8. c-vpftaivei] Sc. r; 8ia(j)opa 
avT-q. Cf. Soph. 228 a. 

11. ILrpi 6\t]v — S0OX01] " Em- 
bracing, as might be antici- 
pated, the whole arrangement 
of life. For we knoAv that 
those who excel in modesty 
are always ready to lead a 
quiet life, doing their own 



business by themselves alone, 
and while they live peaceably 
with all at home, they are 
likewise ready at all points to 
be in a manner at peace with 
foreign cities. And from being 
thus in love with quietness, a 
love not suited to their occa- 
sions, they unconsciously be- 
come unfit for war, and create 
the same defect in their young 
men, and are in the power of 
the first aggressor, whence 
ere many years have passed, 
themselves, their children and 
their whole community have 
often, ere they were aware, 
been reduced from freedom to 
slavery." 

12. ovres €TTiTi6epevcov\ Cf. 

Soph. (Ed. Eex. 917 : a\X' ecm 

rov Xeyovros. lb. Gild. Col. 
756 : tovttlovtos apirdcrai. 



A a 2 



And the 
sort who 
incline to 



ISO IIAAT0NO2 

reo? (Totfioi iravTa owes rplmov TLva dyuv elprjvyv. p. 3c 

KCLL 8ia TOV €pO)Ta 8t) TOVTOV, UKaip<)T€f)OV OVTCL r) XPVi 

qtolv a (3ovAoi>tcu 7rpaTTco(Tii>, tXaOov clvtol re uiro- 
Xe/jLco? ta)(oi>T€9 koll tovs veovs oxravrcos 8iaTi0€VT€? 
5 6We? re del twv €7rtTi.d€p.ei>coi>, tij d>v ovk Iv ttoXXols 
€T€criu avTol Kai Troupes koll tjv/JLTraaa r\ ttoXis avr 
eXevOepcov noXXaKis eXaQov civtovs yevop.evoL 8ovXol. p 30 
NE. 20. XaXewov eiVe? koll 8eivhv iraOos. 
SE. Tt 8' ol 77-/30? tt)v dv8peiav llolXXov piirovTVi ; 
odp ovk hri iroXeLtov del Tiva ret? avrcov ^vvTeivovrts 
everstir- woXets 81a tt)V tov TOLOvTou (3lov o~(po8poTepav rov 

strffeand 8e0VT09 llTlQv\Xiav, €L9 6\dpav TToXXoh KCU 8vvCLT0LS 

quarrels 15 /coa-aorayre?, 7] irdpurav 8i(aXeaav ?) 8ovXa? av Kai 
MneSbT" VTToyeipiovs tols eyOpoh viriOeaav tols avrutu ira- 

%? m °P NE. 20. "Ear, «* rccvra. _ b 

opposite &E. riooy ouj> /x?) (pco/uLtv ev tovtol? d/xcfjorepa 

ravra ra yevrj iroXXr/v irpos aXXrjXa del kou ttjv 
fieylo-Trjv 'layetv eyOpav kou ordaiv ; 
20 NE. 20. Ov8a/xco9 a>? ov (f)r)o-o/jL€i>. 

HE. OlfKOVV 07T€p i7reO-K07TOV/JL€V kglt ap^a?, 
dvevprjKafxev, on /xopia dperrjs ov apuKpd dXX-qXois 
8ia(j)€pea6ov (pvaei Kai 8r) koll tow IcrypvTas 8pdjov 
to avTo tovto ; 



1. TTavra] Adverbial. 19. i'xdpnv kci\ a-rdaiv] Supr. 

7. noWaKis — 8av\oi] Note 306 b. The writer seems to 

the rhythm. The style of this pass almost unconsciously from 

passage is closely similar to the one meaning of o-rdo-is to 

that of the Laws. the other. 

IO. %vvteivovT£S ] Cf. Rep. 20. OvSap.£>s ws ov] The 

9, 590 b : otuv to Xeovrcodes — adverbial form of oidels 00-- 

o-WTeivr)T(ii dvappdaTas. tis ov. 

13. KaTaardvTes] Qy. KaraaTr)- 23. dparou to avro tovto] Sc 

vavTes 1 noiovaiv 8u«ptpeiv. 



nOAITIKC)2. 



181 



308. 



NE. 20. Kiv8vvev€Tov. 

3?E. To5e tolvvv av Xd(3co/j.ev. 

NE. 20. To two* ; 

SE. El' r/ff 7rou ra>*> avvOeTiKcov ejriaTyjpcov 
irpdypa otlovv tcov avTTJs epycov, kolv el to c/>gcuAo-5 
toltov, (Kovcra t/c poyOrjpcov /cat xprjo-Tcov tlvcov £vvl- 
arrjaLU, rj Trdaa emo-Tr)p.r] iravrayov tcl p.ev pLoyO^pd 
els dvvapiv a7ro(3aXXei, tcl 8 e7riTr)8eia /cat xprjorTa 
eXafiev, Ik tovtcov 8e /cat bpLOitov /cat dvopLoicov ovtcov, 

f » a > \ > / / v s> ' v cast the bad 

TtavTa eis ev avTa ^vvayovaa, puav Tiva 0vvap.1v /cat i° asvay .And 

'?>' S ~ will nut the 

ideav d^fiiovpyei. polilical 

science, 
then, com- 
bine good 
elements, 
whether 
like or un- 



Now let us 

ask whe- 
ther any 
.art 1 if com- 
bination 
will not 
first select 
good ele- 
ments to 
be com- 
bined, and 



NE. 20. Tifirjv; 

HE. OvS 1 dpa r) kclto. fyvcnv dXyOais ovcra r)plv 
d ttoXltlkt] pur) iroTe e/c xprjaTcov kou kolkcov dvOpcoircov 
eKodcra eivai avaTrjarjTaL ttoXlv Tiva, dXX' ev'8rjXovis llk 
otl 7rai8ia 7rpcoTov fiaaavie'i, peTtx 8e tx\v /3daavov av 
toIs 8vvapevois 7rai.8eveiv K.a\ virr/peTelv npos tovt 
avTO 7rapa8(oaei, 7rpoo~TaTTOvaa /cat hno~TaTovo~a 
avTrj, KaOdirep vcpavTiKr/ toIs re tjalvovcri /cat tols 



There can- 
not be a 
good com- 
bination of 
good and 
bad. 

And as the 
weaver pre- 
sides over 



5. kclv ei] Cf. Soph. 247 d, 
267 e ; Phileb. 58 c. 

13. OuS' apa — eVto-rarft] "Nor 
is it possible then that our 
art of statesmanship, in the 
true and natural sense, will 
ever (if this can possibly be 
avoided) form a city by the 
combination of bad and good : 
but she will clearly first test 
her subjects by some child's- 
play, after which she will en- 
trust them to those who are 
able to educate youth and to be 
her ministers for this end: and 
over these she will maintain 
authority, just as the art of 
weaving continually presides 



over and directs the carders 
and the rest who prepare what 
is necessary for her use in the 
production of her fabric." 

1 4. £k XPT]<Tt£)V Kdl KCIKCOV ] 

Contrast Thucyd. VI. 18 : to re 
(pav\ov kol to picrov ku\ to ttuvv 
dxpifies av £vyKpadev pakiuT uu 
lo~xveiv. 

1 6. 7rai8ta {3ao-avic'i] Cf. Pi ep. 

3> 413 ; Legg. 1, 648; supr. 
307 & 

17. Koi VTTrjpeTe'iv npos tovt 

avTo] Seeing that the art of 
education also is ministerial to 
the state. Cf. supr. 304. 

19. Kadatrep vqbavTiKi]\ Supr. 
p. 282. 



1 82 



nAAT0N02 



the prepa- 
ratory pro- 
cesses of 
cardingand 
Bpinning,80 
this Bcience 
will deliver 
those whom 
she selects 
to educa- 
tors, over 
w hose work 
she will 
herself pre- 
side. Those 
incapable 
of moral 
training 
she will 
reject and 
suppress. 
Those of 
an ignorant 
and abject 
nature she 
will en- 
slave. 
The rest, 
who are 
capable 
of being 
moulded 
to a noble 
type and 
drawn 
into har- 
mony, she 



rdXXa 7rpcnrapa(TKtva.(<)V(Tiv ocra irpos tijv irXtfyv p. 30 >' 
avrrj?, ijv/x7rapaKuXov0uvcra irpoaTwrTti koll briara- 
re?, roiavra tKaarois ivBeiKvvaa tu epya dnore- e 
AetV, ola av eTrmjSeia rjyrjrai irpos rrjv avrrjs eivat 
5 ^vpirXoK-qv. 

NE. 20. Ylavv p.lv ovi>. 

SE. Tolvtov 8r/ llol rovO' rj fiaaLXiKr] (fjalisercu 
iraai tols Kara vollov 7rou8evTca? koll Tpofevai, ttjv 
tyjs iTTicrTCLTLKr}? avrrj 8vi>cl/jllv e')(OV(Ta, ovk hriTp&fy&v 

lod(TK€?l> O TL LIT} TLS TTpOS T7]V OLVTYjS j~vyKpO.O~LV d.7T€p- 

ya{p/jL€vos rjOos tl irpiirov dwoTeXei, tolvtol 8e p.ova 
7rapaKe\euea0a.L 7rai8eveii>. koll tovs pev per) 8vva- 
pLtvovs Koivcovelv rfOovs dvSpelov koll aaxfipovos oaa 
re aXXa earl reivovra irpos dper-qv, dXK els d6eo- 

l5Tr)T0L KOLL vfiplV KOLL d$LKLOLV VTTO KaKYjS (3la (f)Va€0)S p. 309 

^diroiOovptvovs*) Oolvcltols re ck^olXXel koll (fivyals 

KOLL TOLLS p.eyl(TTOLLS KoXatfiVCTOL aTLpLLaLS. 

NE. 20. Ae'yeroLL yovv itcds ovtcos. 

SE. Tovs 5' kv dpiaOla r av koll T<mavoTr)Ti 



7. Talrov 877 tovQ' 1 '] "Precisely 
in the same manner it appears 
to me that the kingly art, 
keeping the presidential office 
in her own hands, will not 
permit those who are educat- 
ing and rearing the young 
under the law to practise 
them in aught but that which 
being wrought with a view to 
her process of commingling, 
creates a disposition suitable 
thereto, but in these things 
only she exhorts them to edu- 
cate the young." 

Tavrbv — tovto ] Cogn. ace. 
in apposition with what fol- 
lows 



ravrov 87 kci\ rbv t:oit)tlkov 6 
6p66s vofioderrjs k.t.A. 

15. vtvo Kaiajs /3ia (jivaeas] 

Note the inverted order. 

1 6. * dirodovfievovs * ] Par. H. 
enradovfjievos : cett. dncodovfieva. 

The correction is Stallbaum's. 
The MS. reading requires dX\' 

oaa. I. e. 8vvap.evovs KOivavelv 

tovtwv oaa. But the neuter 
may be defended by supplying 
f/67], as implied in tovs bwafxi- 

vovs KOLvavelv rjdovs. 

17. KoXdfrvaa] There is a 
sort of zeugma here. Only 
a part of the sense of eK/3aAAet 
is to be repeated with the 
participle. 



nOMTIKOS. 183 

309. TroXXfj KvXLvbovpevovs els to SovXlkoi> VTTotj-vyvvai will weave 
, together in 

ytVQS. the follow- 

NE. 20. 'OpOoTOLTOL. taking the 

hti t* v -v > > <" ' j ' » n ^ brav< oa- 

AUt. LOV? A017TOV9 TOLVVV, OCTUiV OLL (pVO~€LS C7Ti TO turea for 
\ <> r ' n > -the warp 

yevvaiov iKavai iraiotias Tvyyavovaai Kauio-Taavai 5 and the 

gentle for 



«$■> the Boftei 

woof. 
As nature 
directs, she 
will bind 



b koll SeijaaOai peTtx T&vyrjs (-vfifiictv irpos a A At; A 

TOVTCOV TOL9 p€V €7TL TT]V OLvbpeLOLV paXXoV ^VVTtLVOV- 

crar, oiov crTi]noi>o<pve? voplaaa auTtou dvai to 

v T/j \pv\>\\/ // v the iminor- 

aTepeov rjuos, tols oe em to Kocrpiov iriovi re /cat t;ll t in 
paXaKw koll kcltol ti)v eiKova KpoKcodei * diainj/juzTi* i t( 
7rpoaxpcopevas, kvavTia 5e Teivovaas aXXrjXcus, iru- 
parai TOiovde tlvol Tpoirov ^vvbtiv koll ^vpirXeKtLV. 

NE. 20. Uolov hi ; Rightopin- 

' ' ion of what 

c 37E. Ylp(OT0v pev kcltol to ^vyyeves to aeLytvls 
bv Trj? "fyvyfjs avT(ov ptpos Oelco ^vvappoaapevrj 



bond, and 
the animal 
part by 
human ties. 



is noble, 
just, and 
good, when 
confirmed 
SeO-pW, peTCL <5e TO OflOV TO tjooytvh CLVTCOV avOtS by reason 

avOpcoirivoLs. ** a d . ivirie 

principle in 
NE. 20. 11(0? TOVT el7T€? OLV ; a godlike 

\ ~ t f v form. 

SE. Tyv tcov kolXcdv koll Slkolloiv irepL koll ay a- The good 



lawgiver 



I. v7ro£evyvv(ri\ Sc. rols ak- depart. Cf. 8t,av6i^a>. Corrected 

Xoir, " makes subject to the by Cornarius. 

rest." 14. Ilpcorov — dvdpcoTriuon ] 

7. ray pev hri — ^vfinXe- " First harmonizing that part 

Kuv~\ " Some natures tending of their soul which is of eter- 

more to courage, whose hard nal origin with a kindred, 

quality she compares to that that is a divine bond; and, 

of the warp, while others are after that which is divine, the 

disposed to gentleness, as if animal nature again with hu- 

spun thick and soft and, ac- man bonds." For the fooyeves 

cording to the image, in the pepos ttjs ^vxns, cf. Tim. 69 c, 

manner of the woof, these op- sqq. 

posite tendencies she tries to 15. 6eia — dvdpconlvois] Cf. 

bind aud weave together in Legg. 1,631b: SinXd 8e dyaffd 

the following way." icrri, rd pev dvdpcaniva, rd be 

gvvreivovcras] Neut. Cf. Slipr. flela' fjpTT)Tai 8° £k tcov Beiav 

294 b. dare pa. 
I O. * 8iavi']pciTi *] MSS. 8iav- 



184 nAATONOS 

Bhould Ool)V KCtl TCOV TOVTOl? (VUVTICOV OVTOi? OVtTGLV dXflOn X). 20 S°9 
alone be v , , , „ , , 

able to im- ootjav fiera (3€J3a.icoar€oo?, ottotolv iv yl/vyrus eyy'iyvrj- 
part tliis , v , f t , 

iv educa- r«f, ^/efa^ r/)j;/zt ei> daipovico yiyveaOat yevei. 

tion In the v/-v / l v 

natureBCa- NE. 20. rT/0€7Tet yOW OUrwy. 

pableofit. ,_ _ v N v v N , v 

Til.- ciieet 5 A^. 1 oj/ o?) ttoXltlkov koll tuv uyaaov VOp.0- (I 

of this ia , 9 , „ f , , , . 

to soften oeTiiv ap lapev otl irpoarjKtL povov Ovvutov 

the brave , „„ , ,v, 

nature, eivai tyj T119 paaiAiKij? povarj tovto avro epTroiav 

lighten the tok opOtos fjL€Ta\a(3ov(Ji 7rGu6Vay, oi)y iAtyopev 

gentle. „ » . 

vvv or) ; 
IO NE. 20. To yow ef/cos 1 . 

HE. ' Os 5' a^ fyjaf ye, w Sw/cpares-, d8vva.Tr] to 
toiovtov, fxi]8e7TOTe toIs vvv ftjTovpevois ovopaaiv 
avrov 7rpoo-ayopevco/i€v. 
NE. 20. 'OpdoTara. 
15 HE. TV ow ; dvSpeia yj/v^r) Xap/Savopevrj tt}? 
TOiavrrjS dXr/0eia? dp* ov^ rjpepovTai koll tcov Sikclloov 
fidXiara outgo KOivooveiv dv iOeXr/aete, pr) peTaXa- e 
/3oDcra Se diroKXivei pdXXov 7rpos OrjpiooSr) tlvol 
(pvaiv ; 
2 o NE. 20. FIw? 5' ov ; 

HE. T7 oY ; to tyj? Koaplas (pvcreco? dp ov tov- 
tcov p\v p.€TaXa(3bv tcov dotjoov ovtgos o-co(ppov kcu 

I. ovTas — /3e/3«iaxrecoy] "Real 913 c: KT>]pa dvrl KTi'jparos apei- 

true opinion with confirma- vov iv dpdvovt Knjo-dpevos, 8ikt]v 

tion : " i. e. knowledge, as de- iv rfj -tyvxrj ttKqvtov 7rpoTipr)- 

fined in Theset. sub. fin. and o-a?. 

Meno 98 a, b ; Phaxlo 76 ; 7. povo-rj] Cf. Rep. 6, 499 

Tim. 51 d, e ; Legg. 2, 653 b. d : avrrj 17 povaa. This use is 

3. 8aifiovi<p yevei ] Sc. rw frequent in the Laws. 

tu>v ^/vx^v : which is at least 1 2. 7-oTs vvv foTuvfiivois 6v6fia- 

Heaven-born, if not Divine. <riv~\ ttuKitlkos, (3aai\iKos, @a- 

Cf. Kara to (rvyyePes supr. <ti\cvs. 

Legg. I, 644 b : w? irparuv Tav 15. avhpeia — (pvaivj Cf. Rep. 

KciWiaTcov tois dpiOTOLS dv- 3,410,411. 
dpdcri 7rapa.y1yv6p.tvov. lb. 1 1, 



H0AITIK02. 



is. 



p.! 09. (f)pbvLp.ov, Ss ye iv 7ro\iT€ia, yiyverai, /x/j KOLvcovrj- 
aav 8e cov Xeyop.ev iirove^Larbv riva evrjQtLus 8i«aio- 
Tara Xafxfidvei (jjypyv ; 

NE. 2D. Yldvv pev ovv. 

AE. Ovkovv ^vpjrXoKrjv koll Secrpov tovtov rots* 
fi€u KOLKOi? 7rpbs a(f)a? avTovs koll rots* dyaOols irpbs 
tov? kclkov? p.r]8eiTOTe 1x.bvLp.0v (ficopev ylyvecrdai, 
pir]de riva e7ri(TTr)p.T]v avTco cnrovbfi irpos tov? tolov- 
tovs olv yjpy](j6ai irore ; 

NE. 20. Ylm ydp ; 

S*E. TW 8' evyeveo-L yevopte'vois re e£ dp\rj9 
fjOecn OpecpOeicri re Kara (fivaiv p.bvoL9 8lol vbpcoov 

€/X(f)V€0~(9ai, KOLL eVt T0VT0L9 8t] TOUT elvOLL T€)(VT) 

<pdpp.aKOv, Kai, KaOdrrep eiiropLev, tovtov deLOTarov 
elvai tov ^vv8eapov dpeTrj? p.epcov *0wr€A* dvop.olcov 
/cat eVn rdvavrla (j)epop.evoiV. 



U il, 1 di 
vine bond 
be once baa 
po ed, the 
human 
links are 
1 :i ily fas- 
tened. 

5 These are 
the laws of 
intermar- 
riage and 
union for 
tliu sake of 
offspring. 
The com- 
mon prac- 
tice is erro- 
neous with 
respect to 
this. 
Not to 
mention 
alliances 
for the sake 
of wealth 
and power, 

, 5 in caring 
for family 
connexion, 
men act 



1. cos ye ev irokiTeiq ] 111 
which it is not possible fully 
to embody the highest wisdom. 
Cf. Rep. 4, 430 c : ttoXu-ikj^ 
ye (avBpeiav). 

2. evrjdelas] Cf. Rep. I, 349b, 

3, 409 a. 

5. tovtov, SC. tov 7roA.iriKoV] 

" Must we not then say that 
the social bond can never 
become lasting either amongst 
bad men or between the bad 
and the good : nor would any 
science ever seriously make 
use of such a bond in relation 
to such materials as these?" 
Qu. an leg. toiovtov 1 

to7s fiev KaKols — dyadols ] 
The datives depend on yiyve- 
o-0ai fiovt/jiov. 

1 1 . Tots' 6° evyeveat — (pepop,e- 
va>v\ Sc. (pafiev. " But in those 
characters which are at once 



noble in their first origin, 
and have been reared accord- 
ingly, in these alone this har- 
mony grows up when fostered 
by the laws, and this medi- 
cine is scientifically destined 
for them ; and, as we have 
said, this is the diviner bond, 
uniting parts of virtue by 
nature dissimilar, and diversely 
bent." 

re] MSS. ye. 

13. tovtois] TheBodl. MS. 
has tovtovs with An. 

14. deioTaTov] So the Bodl. 
MS., with AsnsY. Vulg. 

-Tepov. 

15. * cpvaei *] The conj. of 
Stephanus for the MS. reading 
cpvaecos. The expression dp<rr?)s 
— (pvo-ems, though at first sight 
resembling Soph. 258 b (dare- 
pov popiov oiiVews), is less de- 

B b 



186 



FIAAT0NO2 



on a wrong 
principle, 
aiming 
chiefly at 

I'M '.- Ill 

ease, and 

at consort- 
ing with 

their likes. 



NE. 20. 'AA^cVcrrara. p 

HE. TOW fJLTjV XOLTTOV?, OVTOLS dvdpOmil'OV? 8eCT- 

fiov?, virapypvTOs tovtov tov Oeiov (r^eSbv ovdev ^a- 
Xeirbv ovre ivvotlv ovre evvorjcravTa diroTtXeiv. 
5 NE. 20. II coy Sr), kgu rivets ; 1 

HE. Touy tcov kiriyapLichv kou 7ral8cov KOivtovrjcrecov 
koll tcov irepl ray idla? 6k86(T€1? koll ydfiou?. o'l yap 
ttoXXoi rd irep\ ravra ovk 6p6m ijvvdovvTat 7rpos 
tt]v tcov 7rai8oov yevvqatv. 
io NE. 20. 17 h-q ; 

HE. Ta /xev ttXovtov koll Swdfiecov ev roty tolov- 
tois Sicoyixara ri koll ny dv coy aljia Xoyov cnrovddtpi 
fi€/jL(f)6/jLevof ; 

NE. 20. OuSev. 
l 5 HE. M.aXXov 8e ye dUaiov tcov irep\ Ta yevrj 



, 



fensible. Virtue was too fami- 
liar an abstraction to be thus 
paraphrased. And the reading 
4>vareais may easily have slipt 
in from supr. Koo-p.ias cpvaeoos. 
Cf. SUpr. 308 b : popia dpeTTJs 
ov crp.iK.pa dWrjXots diatpepeadov 
(pixrei. 

6. e7Tiyap,iwv — Koivoovrjcrc-cdv ] 
" Intermarriages, and giving 
and taking of children in mar- 
riage between states." The 

Koivcovia tcov naibcov is not to be 
thought of here. 

8. £w§ovvTai\ Eather mid- 
dle voice with reciprocal mean- 
ing than passive : = " enter into 
mutual bonds." 

12. biaypara ] Cf. Aesch. 
Eum. 136. 

15. nepl ra yevrj] "About good 
family connexions." Stallbaum 
objects that what follows re- 
lates to individual character 



and not to birth, and suggests 
fjdr). But the transition from 
wealth to birth is so natural, 
that Plato here applies the 
latter notion metaphorically, 
which is so much the easier 
as the bold and gentle cha- 
racters are spoken of as yevrj, 
and as the argument requires 
them to be viewed as here- 
ditary. " People at present 
are too clannish in their alli- 
ances : the brave seeks union 
with the brave, the gentle with 
the gentle race." Cf. supr. a : 

rols evyevecri yevopevois. And in- 
fra : to 7Tep\ tx]v dvhpelav yevos — 
dpcporepa ra. yevrj. Also Legg. 3, 
691 e : TJj Kara yevos aiidadel 

pa>p.y. This idea does not 
seem to be present in Tim. 
18 e : oncos 01 kcikoI x^pis °' T * 
dya8o\ Tciis opolais eKarepoi £v\- 

\i]goi>Tai. But then in the Re- 



II0AITIK02. 



187 



jio. 7roLOvp.evtav eiripeXeiav, tovtcov irepi Xeyeiv, el tl p.r/ 
c /caret Tpoirov tt pan ovo tv. 
NE. 20. Ei/coy yap ovv. 

HE. YipdrTOvcn p.ev Sr) ovde i£ evb? 6p6ov Xoyov, 
rrjv ev tco 7rapa\prjpa dicoKOvre? paaTcovrjv Kai tco •■ 
rov9 p.ev irpocropoLovs avTois dairo^eaOaL, tovs <$' 
avopoiov? pi] <TT€pyeii>, irXelcrTOv rfj Svo-x^pela pepos 
chrovepovTes. 

NE. 2ft. Um ; 

HE. Ot pev ttov KoapLioL to crcfieTepov avrcov ?)6o$ 

tflrovcri, kol Kara bvvapav yapoval re irapa tovtcov 

d /cat tol9 eKdtSope'va? irap avrcov el? tovtov? eKirep.- 

ttovctl iraXiv' coy <5' avTcos to irep\ ttjv dvhpeiav yevos 



i Thus the 
sober inter- 
marry with 
the sober, 
the bold 
■with the 
bold. But 
they ought 



public and the opening of the 
Timseus it is assumed that in 
each individual the active and 
philosophic tempers are com- 
bined. In the Laws the harder 
natures are chosen for the 
highest offices, Legg. 5, 734 e : 

Kaddnep ovv 8tj Tiva ^vvvcprjv rj 
■jrXeyp! aXX' otiovv, ovk e'< tcov 
avrcov oiov r c'otI tt]V t ecpvcprjv 
Kai tov o-Trjpova dnepyd^eaBai, 
bia<pepeiv S' dvaymlov to ra>v 
CTrjpovav irpbs dpeTijv yevos' lo~xv- 
pov re yap Kai riva (HeftaioTTjTa iv 
tois rpoirois elX^cpos' to 8e paXa- 
Kcorepov kcu emetKeta tlv\ 8tKaia 
Xpmpevov" odev br) tovs peydXas 
dpxas iv rats iroXeo-iv cipi-ovras 
bel bLaKpiveo-6ai riva rpdnov Tavrij 
Kai tovs o-piKpa Tvai8eia (3ao~avL- 
crde'vTas eKacrTOTe KaTa Xoyov. Cf. 
Arist. Pol. I. 3 : (pi]crl yap 8eiv 
a>o~nep e£ eTepov to o~Ti]pdviov 
epiov yiverai ttjs KpoKrjs, ovtco Kai 
tovs apxovTas exetv 8elv Trpos tovs 
dp^opevovs. The same mixture 
of natures, however, is required 
in the other citizens, Legg. 6, 



773 c • Tavra S17 81a Xoyov pev 
vopco irpoo-TaTTeiv prj yapelv nXov- 
criov nXovcriov pr]8e TroXXd 8vvd- 
pevov npaTTeiv aXXov tolovtov, 
BaTTOvs 8e rjBeai Trpos (3pabvTe- 
povs Kai (3pa8vTe'povs irpbs Quttovs 
dvayKa^eiv ttj tcov ydpav Koivcovia 
TTopeveadat, npos t<5 yeXola elvaL 
Bvpov av iyeipai ttoXXoIs' ov yap 
pa8iov ivvoelv oti ttoXiv eivai 
Set 8[kt)V KpaTTjpos KeKpapevqv, ov 
pawopevos pev oivos eyKexvpevos 
^€i, KoXa£6pevos be vno vrjcpovros 
eTepov 6eov KaX?]v Koivwvlav Xaftcov 
ayaObv Trapa Kai perpiov direpyd- 

ferat. Compare also the com- 
bination of qualities required 
for the guardian in Eep. 2, 
and for the philosopher in 
Rep. 6 and the Thea?tetus. 

5. ttjv — o-Tepyeiv ] There 
is a change of construction 
from the participial form to 
the dative of the manner. 

7. TrXelo-Tov — dnovepovTes] 
" Giving far more importance 
to their dislike than to any 
other consideration." 

b 2 



lcSS 



IIAATONOI 



Spa, ri]v aurov perahicaKOV (f)uaii>, 8eov iroLeiv dp(f)o- p. $l(\] { 
repa to. yevi] tovtcov tovvclvt'lov airav. 

NE. 20. ricoy, kol Stu tl; 

SE. Aiotl irtyvKtv dvSpela re eV 7roXXais yeve- 
5 crecr^ apiKTo? yevucopevrj acotypovL (frvcrei Kara fxtv 
ap^as aKpa^ELv pcofirj, reXevTuxra Se l^avQelv iravTa- 
iraaL pLavious. 

NE. 20. Wlkos. 

SE. r H 8e oddovs ye av Xlav 7rXr)pr)9 yj/vx^ K.ai 
io uKepaaros toA/at)? dvSpelas, im Se yeveas 7roXXa? e 
our&> yevvYjOeicra, ucoOearepa (f)ve<j6ai rod Koupov kol 
diroreXevrwaa brj Travrcmacnv avairrjpovaOaL. 

NE. 20. Kat tovto eiKO? ovrco ijupfiaiveiv. 

HE. Tovtovs Sr) tovs decrptov? eXeyov otl \aXe- 

i5 7rov ovdeu fjvvdeiv virdp^avros rov 7repi ra /caAa 

kolI dyaOd plav Zy£ iV dpfporepa rd yevq dotjav. 



5. aaxfipovL (pvaeij apturos is 

to be joined by hyperbaton to 

o~a>(ppovL (pvo~ei. 

6, i^avOelv — fiaviais~\ Tragic. 
Cf. Soph. Ant. : ovto) rus pavias 
Beivov aTToura^ei av8r)pov re fievos, 
Kflvos eVe'yi/o) paviais K.t.X. Aescb. 
Pei'S. 821 : vfipis yap e^avOova' 
iKapnao-e trrdxyv cittjs. The 

dative p.aviais occurs with simi- 
lar meaning in Legg. 9, 869 a, 
ib. 881 b, ib. 6,783 a. 

9. 'H Be K.r.A.] Sc. 7re(pVKe. 

alBovs ye] Bodl. re. 

II. vu>B. rov K.J I.e. a.Ka'ipa>s 
vcodrjs. Cf. SUpr. 276 e : evrjOe- 
arepa rov Biovros. 308 a. 

14. Tovtovs Br] — eiriTpeneiu'] 

" It was of these bonds I said 
that there would be no diffi- 
culty in creating them, if only 
both the kinds were first im- 



bued with one opinion respect- 
ing what is honourable and 
good. Yes, this is the single 
work in which the whole pro- 
cess of the royal weaving is 
comprised, never to allow tem- 
perate natures to keep aloof 
from the brave, but, warping 
them together by common sen- 
timents, by honours, by repu- 
tation, and by interchange of 
pledges, to form of both a 
smooth and closely-woven web, 
and then to give into their 
hands the offices of state." Cf. 
supr. 310 a, b. Rep. 4, 429 c : 

Bid. TravTOs B' eXeyov avrr)v cra>- 
rrjpiav to — Biaaa>£eo-dai ovttjv 

K.T.X. 

15- £vv8elv vtt.] Bodl. ijvuvw., 

not gvvBeiv £vwTT. (Stallb.) 
16 kci\ dyaBa] Bodl. KayaQa. 



nOAITIKOS. 



189 



310. tovto yap ev koll oXov earl fiacriXiKr}? tjvvvtyavaea)? 
epyov, prj8eiroTe eav atyiaTaadai au>(f)pova diro twv 
dv8pelcov ijOrj, IjvyKepKitpvTa 8e bpodoijlcu? kcu TipaTs 
koll 86^ais koll bpr/peicov eK.86aeo~iv els dXXrjXovs, 



of truth 
and right. 



Com! 
these tw 
kinds by 

every avail- 
able in- 
» ~ \ \ » / c./ fluonce of 

311. XeLOV KCU TO Xeyop.6VOV eV7]TpiOV VCpaapa ^VVayOVTUS opinionand 

custom, the 
kingly art 
will dele- 
gate all 
offices of 
state to 
their joint 
rule, where 



ejj avTcov, rds ev reus noXeaiv dpyas del KOivf) tov- 
tol9 iiriTpeireiv. 

NE. 20. n«y ; 

HE. Ov pev dv evbs apypvros \peia ijvpfialvr), 
tov Tama dpL(f)6repa e^ovTa alpovp.evov e7rio~TaTr)V io[^ e ° de C j r 

OV ft dl> TrXeiOVCOV, TOVTCOV p.epOS eKaTepcOV £vppi- fa^fo*** 

yvvvra. tcl pev yap aco(j)p6viov dpyovTwv rjdr) cr(j)6- j^'J^ 
Spa pev evXafirj Kal SiKaia Ka\ crcoTrjpia, 8pLp.vTT)T0? ta f es ' and 
Be Kal tivos lrap.6rr]T09 bj^eias Ka\ TrpaKTU<r)$ ev- there are 

8uTCU, 

NE. 20. AoKel yovv 8rj Ka\ rdde. 
h aE. Ta 8 dvSpela ye av rrpos pev to 8iKaiov Kal 

evXafies eKelvcov eiriSeecrTepa, to 8' ev Tais Trpd^eai energy and 
^to ptevf 8ia<pep6vTC09 tercet. irdvTa 8e KaXws ylyve- 



leeting 
equally 
from both, 
that the 
state may 
act with 



3. gvyK.epKi£opTa ] "Making 
the web close." Vid. supr. 
note on 282 b. 

4. SfXTjpeicov] "Pledges." The 
word occurs in Thucyd. VIII. 
45 '. Tas vavs ano'keiiruiO'iv vttu- 
XnrovTes es oprjpeiav tov npocro- 
(peikopevov p.io~6ov. 

5. evfjTpiov] " Of an even or 
close texture." The opposite 
is implied in Phsedr. 268 a : 

el ctpa Kal o~o\ cpaiveTai 8ie- 

(JTTjKOS CIVTCOV TO T/TptOV COCTTTep 

epoi. 

12. Ta pev yap — ev8e'iTai] "For 

the character of a temperate 
ruler is very careful and just 
and safe, but is lacking in 



thoroughness, and in a certain 
prompt and active determina- 
tion." 

14. tra/xoVqros] The abstract 
noun occurs only here. For 
Irapos cf. Legg. 6, 773 b, and 
for 'irqs Prot. 349 e. 

18. eniSeeo-repa ] So Bodl. 
with AH. cett. eTTtBeeo-Tepa. 

to — ev Tais irpd£eo-i = to npaK- 

tlkov. But see next note. 

19. fro p-evf] "This, as op- 
posed to the former." Cf. Soph. 

252 d : tovto pev oios re Kuyco 
Biakveiv. to pev SC to dvSpelov 

rjdos. The change from plural 
to singular is noticeable, but 
seems to be required by dpcpo'iv 



iyo 



flAATONOS 



(tOcll to. irepi ras nuAei? 181a. ko! 8i~ifxoaLa tovtolv fxrj p. 
napayevo/Mvoiv dfx(jjolv d8vvaTov. 
NE. 20. Tlco? yap ov ; 

SE. Toi)ro 5?) re'Aoy v^da/iaros evdwrXoKia ^v/x- 
5 7r\aK(i> yiyveaOai (f)apev TroXiTiKrjs irpd^eois, to tcov 

dv8p€L(£>V KOI aC0(f)p6va>V dv0p(O7TU)V 7)009, biTorav 

Ofiovola. Ka\ (f)iAla koivov ^vvayayovaa avTcov tov c 
(3iov r) fiacriXiKr] t4\vtj, iravTwv /x€yaXo7rpe7r€aTaTOv 
v(f)aa fidroiv Ka\ apiarov dnoTeXeaaaa, # a>V y * elvai 
io kolvov, rovs t aXXov? iv rah iroXecri irdvTas 8ovXovs 
kcu iXevOepovs dpm iaypvo a, crvveyr} tovtco tg> irXi- 
yfiaTt, Kal KaO' ocrov ev8aip.ovL Trpoo-qKtL ylyveaOai. 
TroXei, toutov /JL7]8a/mfj /jL7]8ev eXXehrovaa apyjl re /cat 
emo-Tarf}. 



3' 



following. The words are re- 
jected by Ast, who conjectured 
Ira/Mov, and Stallb., who here, as 
elsewhere, unnecessarily sus- 
pects a gloss. Qy. to{j.6v ? Cf. 
Tim. 6 1 e. 

4. Touto §77 — eVtorar^] " This, 
then, according to our view, is 
the perfection of the web of 
political action, directly woven 
— the brave and temperate in 
human character, when the 
kingly science has drawn the 
lives of such men into com- 
munion by unanimity and kind- 
ness, and having thus com- 
pleted the most glorious and 
noble of all webs that are of 
a public nature, and envelop- 
ing therewith all other denizens 
of cities, whether slaves or 
free, binds them by this con- 
texture into one, and leaving 
out no point of a city's happi- 
ness, in as far as it belongs to 
a city to attain to happiness, 



so governs and presides." For 
(vdvTrXoKia, here metaphorically 
applied, cf. supr. 283 a. 

£vfj.7r\ai<ev] Bodl. All, £vfi- 
tiKiKeiv, r. ^vfiirkeKev. ^vfiTTKaKev 

is in keeping with the tragic 
diction of much else in the 
dialogue. Cf. Aesch. Ag. 1 1 7 1 : 

opKOS, Trr/yna yevvaicos TTayev. 

9. *co? y * eivai koivov] MSS. 
coot'. Cf. SUpr., coy ye iv tto\i- 

reiq. It seems to be implied 
that, although this is the best 
common life, a higher life is 
reserved for the individual. 
For the inf., cf. Rep. 4, 430 d. 
But perhaps the words are a 
gloss on koivov supra, as Stall- 
bauni thinks. 

1 1 . d/j.Tr[axovo-a ] Here the 
Bodleian has dfioblo-xovaa (sic) 
with An. 

12. kcl&* ocrov ev^al/xovi K.r.X.] 

Cf. Legg. 3, 697 b : ttjv peWov- 

crav — ev8miiovr)0-eiv els hvvapiv 
dvBpoiTrivrjv. 



II0AITIK02. 



191 



3". NE. 20. KdXXtara 
TeXeaa? av8pa rijiiv, 

TIKOV. 



I. KdWurra k. r. A.] Some 

editors have adopted Stallb.'s 
conjecture, and have attributed 
these words to the philosopher 
Socrates. But it is not likely 
that he would interpose with- 
out giving Young Soci-ates time 
to assent to the last proposi- 
tion. The present expression 
is merely an expanded and 
more courteous form of assent, 
marking the conclusion of the 
argument. It has been already 



av top fiacriXiKov aire- 
h g«/e, koll top ttoXl- 



noticcd, that the dramatic is 
subordinated to the dialectical 
interest of this dialogue. Hence 
there is less motive for intro- 
ducing the elder Socrates again. 
Compare the end of the Par- 
menides. Those, however, who 
think that the praise is more 
becoming in the mouth of the 
philosopher, may suppose that 
the answer of the younger So- 
crates has dropt out, e. g. 'AXtj- 
6e<iTaTd ye. Cf. Soph, ad fin. 



The Btatc 
thus consti- 
tuted will 
be an happy 
as a com- 
munity of 
men can he. 



to/4/99 



(Elavenbon press, ©yforb, 



SELECT LIST OF STANDARD WORKS. 



STANDARD LATIN WORKS .... Page i 

STANDARD GREEK WORKS 3 

MISCELLANEOUS STANDARD WORKS . „ 7 
STANDARD THEOLOGICAL WORKS . . „ 8 



1. STANDARD LATIN WORKS. 



Avianus. The Fables. Edited. 

with Prolegomena, Critical Appa- 
ratus, Commentary, &c, by Robinson 
Ellis, M.A., LL.D. 8vo. 8s. 6c?. 

Caesar. Be Bello Gallico. 

Books I-VII. According to the 
Text of Emanuel Hoffmann 
(Vienna, 1S90). Edited,with Intro- 
duction and Notes, by St. George 
Stock. Post 8vo, 10s. 6d. 

Catulli "Veronensis Liber. 
Iterum recognovit, Apparatum Cri- 
ticum Prolegomena Appendices ad- 
didit, R. Ellis, A.M. 8vo. 16s. 

Catullus, a Commentary on. 

By Robinson Ellis, M.A. Second 
Edition. 8vo. iSs. 

Cicero. Be Oratore Libri 

Tres. With Introduction and Notes. 

By A. S. Wilkins, Litt.D. Svo. 1 8s. 

Also, separately, 

Book I. 7s. 6d. Book II. 5s. 

Book III. 6s. 

Pro Milone. Edited by 

A. C. Clark, M.A. Svo. 8s. 6d. 

Select Letters. With 

English Introductions, Notes, and 
Appendices. By Albert Watson, 
M.A. Fourth Edition. 8vo. 18s. 



Horace. With a Commentary. 

By E. C. Wickham, D. D. Two Vols. 
Vol. I. The Odes, Carmen Secu- 

lare, and Epodes. Third Edition. 

8vo. 12 s. 
Vol. II. The Satires, Epistles, and 

De Arte Poetica. Svo. 1 2s. 

Juvenal. Thirteen Satires. 

Edited, with Introduction and 
Notes, by C. H. Pearson, M.A., and 
Herbert A. Strong, M.A., LL.D. 
Second Edition. Crown Svo. 9s. 

Manilius. Nodes Manilianae ; 

sive Dissertationes in Astronomica Ma- 
nila. Accedunt Coniecturae in Ger- 
manici Aratea. Scripsit R. Ellis. 
Crown Svo. 6s. 

Merry. Selected Fragments 

of Roman Poetry. Edited, with Intro- 
duction and Notes, by W. W. 
Merry, D.D. Second Edition. Crown 
Svo. 6s. 6d. 

Ovid. P. Ovidii Nasonis Ibis. 

Ex Novis Codicibus edidit, Scholia 
Vetera Commentarium cum Pro- 
legomenis Appendice In dice addidit, 
R. Ellis, A.M. Svo. 10s. 6d. 

P. Ovidi Nasonis Tris- 

iium Libri V. Recensuit S. G-. Owen, 
A.M. 8vo. 1 6s. 



Oxford: Clarendon Press. London: Henry Frowde, Amen Corner, E.C. 



STANDARD LATIN WORKS. 



Persius. The Satires. With 

n Translation and Commentary. 

By John Conington, M.A. Edited 

I . v Henry N\-tt loslii]., M.A. Third 

Hon. 8vo. 8s. 6d. 

Plautus. Rudens. Edited, 

with Critical and Explanatory- 
Notes, by E. A. Sonnenschein, 
M.A. 8vo. 8s. 6d. 
The Codex Turnebi of 

Plautus. By W. M. Lindsay, M.A. 
8vo, 2 is. net. 

Quintilian. Institutionis 

Oratoriae Liber Decimus. A Revised 
Text, with Introductory Essays, 
Critical Notes, &c. By W. Peterson, 
M.A., LL.D. 8vo. 12s. 6d. 

Rushforth. Latin Historical 

Inscriptions, illustrating the History of 
the Early Empire. By G. McN. 
Rushforth, M.A. Svo. 10s. net. 

Tacitus. The Annals. Edited, 

with Introduction and Notes, by 
H. Furneaux, M.A. 2 Vols. 8vo. 

Vol. I, Books I-VI. Second Edition. 
1 8s. 

Vol. II, Books XI-XVI. 20s. 



Tacitus. Be Germanic/. By 
the same Editor. 8vo. 6s. 6d. 

Vita Agricolae. By the 

same Editor. 8vo. 6s. 6d. 

DialoguB de Oratoribus. 

A Revised Text, with Introductory 
Essays, and Critical and Explana- 
tory Notes. By W. Peterson, M.A., 
LL.D. 8vo. 1 os. 6d. 

Velleius Paterculus ad M. 

Vinicium Libri Duo. Ex Amerbachii 
praecipue Apographo edidit et 
emendavit R. Ellis, Litterarum 
Latinarum Professor publicus apud 
Oxonienses. Crown 8vo, paper 
boards. 6s. 

Virgil. With an Introduc- 
tion and Notes. By T. L. Papillon, 
M.A., and A. E. Haigh, M.A. 
2 vols. Crown 8vo. Cloth, 6s. each; 
stiff covers 3s. 6d. each. 

Also sold in parts, as follows — 
Bucolics and Qeorgics, 2s. 6d. 
Aeneid, in 4 parts, 2s. each. 



King and Cookson. The Prin- 
ciples of Sound and Inflexion, as illus- 
trated in the Greek and Latin Languages. 
By J. E. King,M.A., and Christopher 
Cookson, M.A. Svo. 18s. 

An Introduction to the 

Comparative Grammar of Greek and 
Latin. Crown Svo. 5s. 6d. 

Lindsay. The Latin Lan- 
guage. An Historical Account of 
Latin Sounds, Sterns and Flexions. 
By W. M. Lindsay, M.A. Demy 
Svo. 2 is. 

Nettleship. Lectures and 

Essays on Subjects connected with Latin 

Scholarship and Literature. By Henry 

Nettleship, M.A. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

Second Series, edited by 

F. J. Haverfield, with Memoir by 
Mrs. Nettleship. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 



Nettleship. Contributions to 

Latin Lexicography. Svo. 21s. 

Sellar. Roman Poets of the 

Augustan Age. By W. Y. Sellar, 
M.A. ; viz. 

I. Virgil. New Edition. Crown 
Svo. 9s. 
II. Horace and the Elegiac 
Poets. With a Memoir of the 
Author by Andrew Lang, M.A., 
and a Portrait. Svo. 14s. 

— ; — Roman Poets of the Re- 
public. Tliird Edition. Crown 8vo. 10s. 

Wordsworth. Fragments and 

Specimens of Early Latin. With Intro- 
ductions and Notes. By J. Words- 
worth, D.D. Svo. 1 8s. 



Oxford : Clarendon 



STANDARD GREEK WORKS. 



2. STANDARD 

Chandler. A Practical Intro- 
duction /a Greek Accent nation, \>y II. W. 
Chandler, M.A. Second Edition. 
i os. 6d. 

Farnell. The Cu IU of the Greek 

States. With Plates. By L. R. Farnell, 

M.A. 
Vols. I and II. Svo.' 32s. net. 
Volume III in Preparation. 

Grenfell. An Alexandrian 

Erotic Fragment and other Greek Papyri, 
chiefly Ptolemaic. Edited by B. P. 
Grenfell, M.A. Small 4 to. 8s. 6d. 
net. 
Grenfell and Hunt. Neiv 
Classical Fragments and other Greek 
and Latin Papyri. Edited by B. P. 
Grenfell, M.A., and A. S. Hunt, 
M.A. With Plates, 1 2s. 6d. net. 

Menanders Teooproc. 

A Revised Text of the Geneva 
Fragment. With a Translation 
and Notes by the same Editors. 
8vo, stiff covers, is. 6d. 

Grenfell and Mahaffy. Rev- 
enue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphia. 
2 vols. Text and Plates, il. us. 6d. 

net. 

Haigh. The Attic Theatre. 

A Description of the Stage and 
Theatre of the Athenians, and of 
the Dramatic Performances at 
Athens. By A. E. Haigh, M.A. 

Second Edition, Bevised and Enlarged. 
Svo. 12s. 6d. 



GREEK WORKS. 

Haigh. The Tragic Drama of 

the Greeks. With Illustrations. 

8vo. 1 2s. 6d. 
Head. Historia Numorum: 

A Manual of Greek Numismatics. 

By Barclay V. Head. Royal Svo, 

half-hound, 2l. 2s. 

Hicks. A Manual of Greek 

Historical Inscriptions. By E. L. 
Hicks, M.A. Svo. 10s. 6d. 

Hill. Sources for Greek His- 
tory between the Persian and Pelopon- 
nesian Wars. Collected and arranged 
by G. F. Hill, M.A. Svo. 10s. 6d. 

Kenyon. The Palaeography 

of Greek Papiyri- Ey Frederic G. 
Kenyon, M.A. Svo, with Twenty 
Facsimiles,and aTable of Alphabets. 

1 os. 6rf. 

Liddell and Scott. A Greek- 
English Lexicon, by H. G. Liddell, 
D. D., and Robert Scott, D. D. Eighth 
Edition, Revised. 4to. il. 16s. 

Monro. Modes of Ancient 
Greek Music. By D. B. Monro, M.A. 
Svo. 8s. 6d. net. 

Paton and Hicks. The In- 
scriptions of Cos. By W. R. Paton 
and E. L. Hicks. Royal Svo, linen, 
with Map, 28s. 

Smyth. The Sounds and 

Inflections of the Greek Dialects (Ionic). 
By H. Weir Smyth, Ph.D. 8vo. 24s. 
Thompson. A Glossary of 
Greek Birds. By D'Arcy W. Thomp- 
son. Svo, buckram, 10s. net. 



Aeschinem et IsocvoXem, Scho- 
lia Graeca in. Edidit G. Dindorfius. 
Svo. 4s. 
Aeschylus. In Single Plays. 
With Introduction and Notes, by 
Arthur Sidgwick, M.A. New 
Edition. Extra fcap. Svo. 3s. each. 
I. Agamemnon. II. Choephoroi. 

III. Eumenides. 
IV. Prometheus Bound. With 
Introduction and Notes, by 
A. 0. Prickard, M.A. Third 
Edition. 2s. 



Aeschyli quae supersunt in 

Codice Laurentiano quoad effici potuit et 
ad cognitionem necesse est visum iypis 
descripta edidit R. Merkel. Small 
folio, il. is. 

Aeschylus : Tragoediae et 
Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Din- 
dorfii. Second Edition. Svo. 5s. 6d. 

Annotationes Guil. Din- 

dorfii. Partes II. Svo. 10s. 



London: Henry Frowde, Amen Coiner, E.C. 



STANDARD GREEK WORKS. 



Apsinis ct Longini Rhctoricc . 

E CodioibuB mss. rocensuit .Toll. 

Bakius. 8vo. 3s. 
Aristophanes. A Complete 

Concordance to the Comedies and Frag- 
ments. By H. Dunbar, M.D. 4to. 
ll. is. 

Comoediae et Fragmenta, 

ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. 
Tomi II. Svo. 1 is. 

Annotationes Guil. Din- 
dorfii. Partes II. 8vo. 1 is. 

Scholia Graeca ex Co- 

dicibus aucta et emendata a Guil. 
Dindorfio. Partes III. 8vo. il. 

In Single Plays. Edited, 

with English Notes, Introductions, 
&c, by W. W. Merry, D.D. Extra 
fcap. Svo. 

TheAcharnians. Fourth Edition, 3s. 

The Birds. Third Edition, 3s. 6d. 

The Clouds. Third Edition, 3s. 

The Frogs. Third Edition, 3s. 

The Knights. Second Edition, 3s. 

The Wasps. 3s. 6d. 
Aristotle. Ex recensione 

Im. Bekkeri. Accedunt Indices 
Sylburgiani. Tomi XI. 8vo. 2I. 10s. 
The volumes (except I and IX) may 
be had separately, price 5s. 6d. each. 

Ethica Nicomachea, re- 
cognovit brevique Adnotatione 
critica instruxit I. Bywater. Svo. 6s. 
Also in crown 8vo, paper cover, 3s. 6d. 

Contributions to the 

Textual Criticism of the Nicoma- 
chean Ethics. By I. Bywater. 2s. 6d. 

Notes on the Nieoma- 

cheanEthics. ByJ.A. Stewart,M.A. 
2 vols. 8vo. 32s. 

Selecta ex Organo A ris- 

toteleo Capitula. In usum Scho- 
larum Academicarum. Crown 8vo, 
stiff covers. 3s. 6d. 

Be Arte Poetica Liber. 

Kecognovit Brevique Adnotatione 
Critica Instruxit I. Bywater, Litter- 
arum Graecarum Professor Eegius. 
Post 8vo, stiff covers, is. 6d. 



Aristotle. The Politics, with 
Introductions, Notes, &c, by W. L. 
Newman, M.A. Vols. I and II. 
Medium Svo. 28s. 

Vols. Ill and IV. [/n the Press.'] 

The Politics, trans- 
lated into English, with Intro- 
duction, Marginal Analysis, Notes, 
and Indices, by B. Jowett, M.A. 
Medium Svo. 2 vols. 21s. 

The English Manuscripts 

of the Nicomachean Ethics, described in 
relation to Bekker's Manuscripts and 
other Sources. By J. A. Stewart, 
M.A. (Anecdota Oxon. ) Small 4to. 
3s. 6d. 

Physics. Book VII. 

Collation of various mss. ; with In- 
troduction by R. Shute, M.A. (Anec- 
dota Oxon. ) Small 4to. 2s. 

Choerobosci Dictata in Theo- 

dosii Canones, necnon Epimerismi in 
Psalmos. E Codicibus mss. edidit 
Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi III. 
8vo. 15s. 

Demosthenes. Ex recensione 

G. Dindorfii. Tomi IX. 8vo. 2l. 6s. 

Separately — 

Text, il. is. Annotations, 15s. 

Scholia, 10s. 

Demosthenes and Aeschines. 

The Orations of Demosthenes and 
Aeschines on the Crown. With 
Introductory Essays and Notes. By 
G. A. Simcox, M.A., and W. H. 
Simcox, M.A. 8vo. 12s. 

Demosthenes. Orations 

against Philip. With Introduction 
and Notes, by Evelyn Abbott, M.A., 
and P. E. Matheson, M.A. 

Vol. I. Philippic I. Olynthiacs 

I-III. Extra fcap. 8vo. 3s. 
Vol. II. De Pace, Philippic II. 
De Chersoneso, Philippic III. 
Extra fcap. 8vo. 4s. 6d. 

Euripides. Tragoediae et 

Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Din- 
dorfii. Tomi II. 8vo. 10s. 



Oxford : Clarendon Press. 



STANDARD GREEK WORKS. 



Euripides. 

Guil. Dindorfii 



Annotationes 

Partes II. 8vo. 



Scholia Graeca, ex Codi- 

aibus aucta et emendata a Guil. 
Dindorfio. Tomi IV. 8vo. ll. 16s. 

Hephaestionis Enchiridion, 

Terentianus Maurus, Proclus, &c. Edidit 
T. Gaisford,S.T.P. Tomi II. ios. 

Heracliti Ephesii Reliquiae. 

Recensuit I. Bywater, M. A. Appen- 
dicis loco additae sunt Diogenis 
Laertii Vita Heracliti, Particulae 
Hippocratei De Diaeta Lib. I. , Epi- 
stolae Heracliteae. 8vo. 6s. 

Herodotus. Books V and VI, 

Terpsichore and Erato.- Edited, 
with Notes and Appendices, by- 
Evelyn Abbott, M.A., LL.D. 8vo, 
with two Maps, ios. 6d. 

Homer. A Complete Con- 
cordance to the Odyssey and Hymns of 
Homer; to which is added a Con- 
cordance to the Parallel Passages in 
the Iliad, Odyssey, and Hymns. 
By Henry Dunbar, M.D. 4to. 
iZ. is. 

A Grammar of the Ho- 
meric Dialed. By D. B. Monro, M. A. 
8vo. Second Edition. 14s. 

Ilias, ex rec. Guil. Din- 
dorfii. 8vo. 5s. 6d. 

Scholia Graeca in 

Hiadem. Edited by W. Dindorf, 
after a new collation of the Venetian 
mss. by D. B. Monro, M.A. 4 vols. 
8vo. 2l. ios. 

Scholia Graeca in 

Hiadem Townleyana. Recensuit 
Ernestus Maass. 2 vols. 8vo. 
il. 16s. 

ex rec. G. 

5s. 6d. 

Graeca in 

Edidit Guil. Dindorfius. 
8vo. 15s. 6d. 



Dindorfii. 8vo 

Scholia 



Tomi II. 



Homer. Odyssey. Books I- 
XII. Edited with English Notes, 
Appendices, &c. By W. W. Merry, 
D.D., and James Riddell, M.A. 

Srcoiul Villi ion. NV". 1 6s. 



Books 

B. Mom 



XIII- 

>, M.A. 



XXIV. By D. 

[In the Press.'] 

Hymni Homerici. Codi- 

cibus denuo collatis recensuit 
Alfred us Goodwin. Small folio. 
With four Plates. 2 is. net. 

Homeri Opera et Reliquiae. 

Monro. Crown 8vo. India Paper. 
Cloth, ios. 6d. net. 
Also in various leather bindings. 

Oratores Attici, ex recensione 
Bekkeri : 

Vol. III. Isaeus, Aeschines, 
Lycurgus, Dinarchus, &c. 
8vo. 7s. 
[Vols. I and II are out of print] 

Index Andocideus, Ly- 

curgeus, Dinarcheus, confectus a 
Ludovico Learning Forman, Ph.D. 
8vo. 7s. 6d. 

Paroemiographi Graeci, quo- 
rum pars nunc primum ex Codd. mss. 
vulgatur. Edidit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. 
1836. 8vo. 5s. 6d. 

Plato. Apology, with a re- 
vised Text and English Notes, and 
a Digest of Platonic Idioms, by 
James Riddell, M.A. Svo. 8s. 6d. 

Philebus, with a revised 

Text and English Notes, by Edward 
Poste, M.A. Svo. 7s. 6d. 

Republic. The Greek 

Text. Edited, with Notes and 
Essays, by B. Jowett, M.A. and 
Lewis Campbell, M.A. In three 
vols. Medium Svo. 2I. 2s. 

Sophistes and Politicus, 

with a revised Text and English 
Notes, by L. Campbell, M.A. Svo. 
ios. 6d. 



London: Henry Frowde, Amen Corner, E.O. 



STANDARD GREEK WORKS 



Plato. T// ('<<<>!('/ tis, with a re- 
vised Text and English Notes, by 
L. Campbell, M.A. Second Edition. 
8vo. i os. 6d. 

The Dialogues, trans- 
lated into English, with Analyses 
and Introductions, by B. Jowett, ! 
M.A. Third Edition. 5 vols, medium 
8vo. Cloth, 4?. 4s.; half-morocco, 5?. 

The Republic, translated 

into English, with Analysis and 
Introduction, by B. Jowett, M.A. 
Third Edition. Medium 8vo. 1 2s. 6d. ; 
half- roan, 14s. 

With Introduction and 

Notes. By St. George Stock, M.A. 
Extra fcap. 8vo. 

I. The Apology, 2s. 6d. 
II. Crito, 2s. III. Meno, 2s. 6d. 

Selections. With Intro- 
ductions and Notes. By John Purves, 
M.A., and Preface by B. Jowett, 
M.A. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 
Svo. 5s. 

A Selection of Passages 

from Plato for English Readers; from 
the Translation byB. Jowett, M.A. 
Edited, with Introductions, by 
M. J. Knight. 2 vols. Crown Svo, 
gilt top. 12s. 

Plotinus. Ediclit F. Creuzer. 

Tomi III. 4to. il. 8s. 

Polybius. Selections. Edited 

by J. L. Strachan- Davidson, M.A. 
With Maps. Medium Svo. 2 is. 

Plutarehi Moralia, id est, 

Opera, exceptis Vitis, reliqua. Edidit 
Daniel Wyttenbach. Accedit Index 
Graecitatis. Tomi VIII. Partes 
XV. 1795-1830. Svo, cloth, 2,1. 1 os. 

Sophocles. The Plays and 

Fragments. With English Notes and 
Introductions, by Lewis Campbell, 
M.A. 2 vols. Svo, 1 6s. each. 
Vol.1. Oedipus Tyrannus. Oedi- 
pus Coloneus. Antigone. 
Vol. II. Ajax. Electra. Trachi- 
niae. Philoctetes. Fragments. 



Sophocles. Tragoediae et 

Fragmenta, ex recensions et cum 
• ■••in iii<-iit :irii.s Guil. Dindorfii. Third 
Edition. 2 vols. Fcap. Svo. 
Each Play separately, limp, 



t otim 

i. Third 

ll. 18. 
28. 6rf. 



Tragoediae et Fragmenta 

cum Annotationibus Guil. Dindorfii. 
Tomi II. 8vo. 10s. 

The Text, Vol. I. 5s. 6d. 

The Notes, Vol. II. 4s. 6d. 

Stobaei Florilegium. Ad 

mss. fidem emendavit et supplevit 
T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi IV. 8vo. it 

Eclogarum Physicarum 

et Ethicarum libri duo. Accedit 
Hieroclis Commentarius in aurea 
carmina Pythagoreorum. Ad mss. 
Codd. recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. 
Tomi II. Svo. us. 

Strabo. Selections, with an 

Introduction on Strabo's Life and 
Works. By H. F. Tozer, M.A., 
F.R.G.S. Svo. With Maps and 
Plans. 12 s. 

Theodoreti Graecarum Affec- 

tionum Ouratio. Ad Codices mss. 
recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Svo. 
7s. 6d. 

Thueydides. Translated into 

English, with Introduction, Mar- 
ginal Analysis, Notes, and Indices. 
By B. Jowett, M.A. [Reprinting.'] 

Xenophon. Ex recensione et 

cum annotationibus L. Dindorfii. 
Historia Graeca. Second Edition . 

Svo. 1 os. 6d. 
Expeditio Cyri. Second Edition. 

8vo. ios.6d. 
Institutio Cyri. 8vo. 10s. 6d. 
Memorabilia Socratis. Svo. js. 6d. 
Opuscula Politica Eqtieslria et 

Venatica cum Arriani Libello 

de Venatione. 8vo. 10s. 6d. 



Oxford: Clarendon Press. 



MISCELLANEOUS STANDARD WORKS. 



3. MISCELLANEOUS 

Arbuthnot. The Life and 

Works of John Arbuthnot. By George 
A. Aitken. Svo, cloth extra, with 
Portrait, 16s. 

Bacon. The Essays. Edited 

with Introduction and Illustrative 
Notes, by S. H. Reynolds, M.A. 
Svo, half-bound, 1 2s. 6d. 

Casaubon (Isaac), 1559-1614. 
By Mark Pattison, late Eector of 
Lincoln College. Second Edition. 
Svo. 1 6s. 

Finlay. A History of Greece 

from its Conquest by the Romans to the 
present time, B.C. 146 to a. d. 1864. 
By George Finlay, LL.D. A new 
Edition, revised throughout, and in 
part re-written, with considerable 
additions, by the Author, and edited 
by H. F. Tozer, M.A. 7 vols. Svo. 
ll. 1 os. 

Gaii Institutionum Juris 

Civilis Commentarii Quattuor ; or, Ele- 
ments of Eoman Law by Gaius. 
With a Translation and Commen- 
tary by Edward Poste, M.A. Third 
Edition. Svo. iSs. 

Hodgkin. Italy and her In- 
vaders. With Plates and Maps. By 
Thomas Hodgkin, D.C.L. a.d. 
376-744. Svo. Vols. I and II, Second 
Edition, 2l. 2s. Vols. Ill and IV, 
Second Edition, ll. 16s. Vols. V and 
VI, it. 16s. Vol. VII. In the Press. 

Hooker, Sir J. D., and B. D. 

Jackson. Index Keivensis. 2 vols. 
4to. 10I. 1 os. net. 

Ilbert. The Government of 

India ; being a Digest of the Statute 
Law relating thereto. With 
Historical Introduction and Illus- 
trative Documents. By Sir 
Courtenay Ilbert, K.C.S.I. Svo, 
half-roan, 2 is. 



STANDARD WORKS. 

Justinian. Imperatoris Tus- 

tiniam Institutionum Libri Quattuor', 
with Introductions, Commentary, 
Excursus and Translation. By 3 . B. 
Moyle, D.C.L. Third Edition. 2 vols. 
Svo. 22s. 

Machiavelli. II Principe. 

Edited by L. Arthur Burd. With 
an Introduction by Lord Acton. 

Svo. 14s. 

Pattison. Essays by the late 

Hark Pattison, sometime Rector of 
Lincoln College. Collected and 
Arranged by Henry Nettleship, 
M.A. 2 vols. 8vo. 24s. 
Payne. History of the Ne%v 
World called America. By E. J. 
Payne, M.A. Svo, Vol. I, 18s. ; 
Vol. II, 14s. 

Kalegh. Sir Walter Ralegh. 

A Biography. By W. Stebbing, 
M.A. Svo. 10s. 6d. 

Ramsay. The Cities and 

Bishoprics ofPhrygia ; being an Essay 
on the Local History of Phrygia, 
from the Earliest Times to the 
Turkish Conquest, By W. M. 
Ramsay,D.C.L.,LL.D. Vol.1. Part 
I. The Lycos Valley and South-Western 
Phrygia. Royal Svo, linen, 18s. net. 
Vol. I. Part II. West and West- 
Central Phrygia. Royal Svo, linen, 
2 is. net. 

Stokes. The Anglo -Indian 

Codes. By Whitley Stokes, LL.D. 
Vol. I. Substantive Law. 8vo. 30s. 
Vol. II. Adjective Law. 8vo. 35s. 

Strachey. Hastings and The 

Bohilla War. By Sir John Strachey, 
G.C.S.I. Svo, cloth, 10s. 6d. 

Thomson. Notes on Recent 

Researches in Electricity and Magnetism. 
By J. J.Thomson, M.A.,F.R.S. Svo. 
iSs. 6d. 
Woodhouse. Aetolia; its 

Geography, Tojmgraphy, and Antiquities. 
By William J. Woodhouse, M.A., 
FlR.G.S. With Maps and Illus- 
trations. Royal Svo, linen, price 

2 is. net. 



London : Henry Frowpe, Amen Corner, E.C. 



STANDARD THEOLOGICAL WORKS. 



4. STANDARD THEOLOGICAL WORKS, &c. 



St. Basil : The Booh of St. 

Basil on the Holy Spirit. A Kevised 
Text, with Notes and Introduction 
by C. F. H. Johnston, M.A. Crown 

8vo. 7.S. (til. 

The Coptic Version of the 

New Testament, in the Northern 
Dialect, otherwise called Memphitic and 
Bohairic. With Introduction, Criti- 
cal Apparatus, and Literal English 
Translation. The Gospels. 2 vols. 
8vo. 2l. 2S. 

Bright. Chapters of Early 

English Church History. By W. Bright, 
D.D. Third Edition. 8vo. 1 2s. 

Canons of the First Four 

General Councils of Nicaea, Con- 
stantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon. 
With Notes, by W. Bright, D.D. 
Second Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

The Book of Enoch. Trans- 
lated from Dillmann'sEthiopic Text 
(emended and revised), and Edited 
by K. H. Charles, M.A. Svo. 16s. 

Conybeare . Th e Key of Truth. 
A Manual of the Paulician Church 
of Armenia. The Armenian Text, 
edited and translated with illus- 
trative Documents and Intro- 
duction by F. C. Conybeare, M.A. 
Svo. 15s. net. 

Driver. The Parallel Psalter, 

being the Prayer-Book Version of 
the Psalms and a New Version, ar- 
ranged in parallel columns. With an 
Introduction and Glossaries. By 
the Rev. S. R. Driver, D.D., Litt.D. 
Extra fcap. Svo. 6s. 



Ecclesiasticus (xxxix. 15 — 
xlix. 11). The Original Hebrew, 
with Early Versions and Knglish 
Translations, itc. Edited by A. 
Cowley, M.A., and Ad. Neubaueb, 
M.A. 4to. 10s. 6d. net. 

Hatch and Redpath. A Con- 
corda/nce to the Greek Versions and 

J/inrrif/iltiil Jinnl.-s of the Old Testament. 
By the late Edwin Hatch, M.A., and 
H. A. Redpath, M.A. In Six Parts. 
Imperial 4to. 21s. each. 

Ommanney. A Critical Dis- 
sertation on the Athanasian Creed. Its 
Original Language, Bate, Authorship^ 
Titles, Text, Reception, and Use. By 
G. D. W. Ommanney, M.A. 8vo. 
1 6s. 

Turner. Ecclesiae Occiden- 

talis Monumenta Iuris Antiquissima : 
Canonum et Conciliorum Grae- 
corum Interpretationes Latinae. 
Edidit Cuthbertus Hamilton 
Turner, A.M. Fasc. I. pars. I. 
4to, stiff covers, 10s. 6d. 

Wordsworth and "White. 

Nouum Testamenlum Domini Nostri 
Iesu Christi Latine, secundum Edi- 
tionem Sancti Hieronymi. Ad 
Codicum Manuscriptorum fidem 
recensuit Iohannes Wordsworth, 
S.T.P., Episcopus Sarisburiensis ; 
in operis societatem adsumto 
Henrico Iuliano White, A.M. 4to. 
Pars I, buckram, 2l. 12s. bd. 

Also, separately — 
Fasc. I. 1 2s 6d. ; Fasc. II. 7s 6d. ; 
Fasc. III. 12s. 6d. ; Fasc. IV. 10s. 6d. 
Fasc. V. 10s. 6d. 



Oxfotb 



AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 
LONDON: HENRY FROWDE 

OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, AMEN CORNER, E.C. 



*?-£$ 















^ V ^o X 















, f 






fi X 



o N 






2 . \ . 






-X' 




^ ■«•, 



r> O V 

.cr c ° * " % 












■v <$*, 












- : - >-- ^j ^ 












« 






f : 



£ '*** 












^ 

%. ^ 



^> V 



& \ 












